Amidst a heat wave in Madison, people who were once incarcerated in Wisconsin’s prison system and supporters gathered Wednesday morning to protest outside the Wisconsin Department of Corrections central office. 

Speakers supported a lower prison population, better living conditions for incarcerated people and independent oversight of the prison system, which has been the target of criticism for a rash of deaths in custody as well as conditions of confinement in aging, understaffed facilities.

“There’s a severe overcrowding crisis in Wisconsin’s prison system right now,” said Mark Rice, transformational justice campaign coordinator for the nonprofit advocacy group WISDOM. Rice said the crisis is creating dangerously unstable conditions for people who work in the prisons as well as incarcerated people. 

In October, the State of Wisconsin Building Commission voted to release $15 million to prepare preliminary plans and a design report for a prison system revamp, a first step toward large-scale structural change to the system of prison facilities.

Rice urged people to get out and vote, and said voters should talk with candidates and elected officials about the state of Wisconsin’s corrections system. He referenced WISDOM’s gubernatorial candidate forum last month. 

“I want to see candidates have the courage to step up and talk about these issues, too,” Rice said. 

The Wisconsin Department of Corrections provided a detailed statement in response to a request for comment from the Examiner, replying to the criticisms of Wisconsin’s corrections system from activists. 

The department first directed the Examiner to the last four state budgets proposed by Gov. Tony Evers, “much of which were rejected by the Republican-controlled Legislature,” communications director Beth Hardtke said. 

“Beyond that, you will need to ask lawmakers what their plans are to address Wisconsin’s corrections challenges and move our correctional system into the 21st Century,” she said.

Different portrayals of solitary confinement

Activists at the protest and the DOC differed in their descriptions of what it’s like to experience solitary confinement in the Wisconsin prison system. 

Rice told the Examiner that stories shared about solitary confinement and “other inhumane conditions of confinement” during his group’s virtual meetings had inspired the protest. At an event covered by the Examiner last year, people who experienced solitary confinement described it as traumatizing, and questioned its effectiveness as a way to change behavior as well as arguing that incarcerated people are sometimes put in solitary for things they shouldn’t be punished for. 

Talib Akbar of the WISDOM affiliate MOSES showed the Examiner a portable replica of a solitary confinement cell inside a truck, which was parked in the Department of Corrections parking lot during the protest. 

Akbar, who said he left prison in 2013, said the truck is based on a replica constructed by Edgewood College over a decade ago. That replica was based on Akbar’s own experience in solitary confinement. 

Hot days, like the day of the protest, can bring an additional burden for people in prisons, many of whom do not have access to air conditioning. 

Crystal Keller of FREE Movement, which focuses on women impacted by the justice system, said she’s been raising her grandson while her daughter has been incarcerated at Taycheedah Correctional Institution. She said her daughter is currently in restrictive housing, also known as solitary confinement. 

“Because she doesn’t have access to a tablet, my daughter and I are limited to one 15-minute phone call every nine or 10 days,” Keller said, adding that she can’t visit her daughter in person in restrictive housing and that logging onto video visits requires driving more than an hour each way. 

Hardtke, the DOC communications director, said in her statement to the Examiner that the “popular image” of restrictive housing often shows a “small dark room,” which she said is inaccurate. 

“I should also note that the popular image of restrictive housing often shows a small dark room,” Hardtke said. “It’s not accurate. The cells in the restricted housing unit at Waupun Correctional Institution, for example, have windows where individuals can see outdoors. Individuals can control their own lights in their cells. Clocks are hung to be visible from every cell front.”

Hardtke stated that people in disciplinary separation — people sent to solitary confinement because they were found to have committed a violation — “still have plenty of human interaction each day.” She attached a copy of a restrictive housing policy and said it lays out that a person is supposed to be kept there for the “minimum amount of time necessary to help them change their behavior.”

“They have access to visits, recreation, therapy and programming in their cell and on the restrictive housing unit,” Hardtke said. “Communication with family and others is not cut off. Individuals in disciplinary separation also have the opportunity to be released back into the general population after serving only half of their sentence if their behavior in restrictive housing is appropriate.”

A report the DOC released in November from its partnership with Falcon Inc., a consulting and management firm, took a different tone on solitary confinement. 

The DOC has contracted with the firm to implement a series of reform proposals, the Examiner reported earlier this month.

The Falcon report released in November stated that out-of-cell programming and recreation time is “very limited,” and that each individual in restrictive housing should receive a minimum of two hours of out-of-cell time per day for recreation and/or programming, not including necessary activities like showers. 

A person involved with the Wisconsin Mental Health Action Partnership (MHAP), which aims to improve mental health care in Wisconsin, sent the Examiner a slideshow dated March of this year that the DOC reportedly presented to one of the group’s committees. 

The slideshow indicates that the Department of Corrections was stating that the agency would need at least one of the following to provide two hours of out-of-cell time per day for each person in restrictive housing: additional staffing, material resources, new construction or remodeling, technology upgrades or significant changes to current policies or operations. 

The Falcon report also stated that restrictive housing initiatives still require support, particularly to improve conditions for incarcerated people and staff. It made a series of recommendations that aim to decrease the overall use of restrictive housing and improve living conditions, though the slideshow indicates the DOC stated further change is needed before some of these recommendations are feasible.

The report also noted potential negative effects of solitary confinement in general (not specifically analyzing Wisconsin) including physical harm and negative effects on mental health and overall well-being, as well as an increased risk for self-harm and suicide. 

Calls for oversight

One speaker at the protest read a statement from the prison reform advocacy group Ladies of SCI, calling for an ombudsman office for corrections that would help address complaints about prison problems, instead of relying on the prison system’s internal complaint process. 

Prison reform activists have been calling for Wisconsin to join the ranks of states with independent prison oversight bodies since at least 2024. Hardtke told the Examiner that the Department of Corrections supported Evers’ plan to create a DOC ombudsperson’s office, which the governor proposed as part of the last state budget. 

“Again, that is not something the agency can do without legislative action and funding,” Hardtke said. 

Last year, Evers proposed an Office of the Ombudsperson for Corrections that would have been attached to the Department of Corrections, which was removed by lawmakers. Wisconsin Public Radio reported that officials with Evers’ administration said the office would operate in a “functionally independent” manner. 

“We’d much rather see it be completely separate to stay with the purpose of an ombudsman,” Susan Franzen of Ladies of SCI told the Examiner over email last year. “But we would be supportive of any movement towards some sort of oversight at this point.” Rebecca Aubart, of the same group, said that if the office Evers proposed was not independent, it could not be properly described as an ombudsman. 

In February 2025, Wisconsin Public Radio reported that Senate President Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) criticized the proposal, stating that “de facto lifetime appointments (which the ombudsperson appears to be), almost a dozen new bureaucrats, and millions of dollars are not creative solutions.” 

Overcrowded prisons, especially for women

Yolanda Perkins, of FREE Movement, said that overcrowding in prisons is “suffocating,” not just uncomfortable, and is an environment where mental health breaks down. 

“Women are entering into a system, carrying (trauma already), and instead of receiving care, they are met with long waits, limited access or no support at all,” Perkins said. “Pain that can be treated is ignored until it becomes a crisis.”

In May, Wisconsin Watch reported that the state’s three women’s prisons collectively housed 18 women for every 10 the prisons were designed to hold, and that they were the most crowded of all state facilities. 

In a court filing in April, the DOC said that due to overcrowding, Taycheedah Correctional Institution, a women’s prison, had already undergone conversions to turn spaces into living areas that were not originally meant to be living areas.

Wisconsin Watch reported that Hardtke said beds have previously been set up in the gym at Taycheedah but that no one was currently living in the gym. Hardtke said staff were converting a “former property room” into a dormitory to house 20 women.

This isn’t unheard of for Taycheedah. A 2020 draft report on the DOC’s website indicates that at the time of the report, 340 incarcerated women were living in two “very old buildings” that had been converted into correctional housing. Some group rooms and an office space in those buildings 

Most of the 50-square-foot maximum security, non-segregated cells at the often-scrutinized Green Bay and Waupun Correctional Institutions were being used for double occupancy, and failed to meet standards such as the American Correctional Association Standards for Adult Correctional Institutions.

The Examiner reported in April on how the DOC has said it wants a program that would allow eligible incarcerated women to live with their babies within prison walls but that this is “currently impossible” in the existing prison system. The department cited a lack of sufficient funding and overcrowding in women’s prisons. 

Hardtke said that the Department of Corrections’ role in the justice system is to carry out the sentence the courts impose on a person as well as provide opportunities for rehabilitation and skills so that people can successfully return to communities. 

Except under limited circumstances such as the earned release program, the department doesn’t have the ability to alter a person’s sentence, Hardtke said, adding that reducing the prison population would require legislative changes and resources. 

Community corrections

At the protest, Rice argued that the Department of Corrections needs to put fewer people back behind bars for breaking a rule of their supervision in the community without committing a new crime. 

Rice argued that the money that’s being “wasted” on this type of revocation could be used to help incarcerated people return to the community. 

In her statement to the Examiner, Hardtke argued that while advocates highlight cases where a person’s community supervision was revoked for violating the rules of supervision, most individuals returned to prison have their supervision revoked for criminal behavior. 

Hardtke said that the DOC’s research and policy team recently looked at revocations for 2024 and 2025 to determine how many were solely for rules violations. She said that in 2025, 6,952 people had their community supervision revoked for a criminal offense and 1,188 individuals were revoked because of a non-criminal rules violation. 

In 2024, 7,064 people were revoked for a criminal offense and 1,026 were revoked for a non-criminal rules violation, she said. 

On June 19, Gov. Tony Evers announced the names of eight appointees to the newly formed Commutation Advisory Board he created by executive order on April 4.

Under the governor’s authority in the Wisconsin Constitution, a commutation, which is a shortening or a modification of a criminal sentence, is one of the governor’s powers of clemency along with pardons and reprieves.

Evers said in his executive order creating the board that offering commutations “promotes rehabilitation by providing a system that rewards the positive efforts of incarcerated individuals who demonstrate personal growth and a commitment to change with the possibility of a second chance to contribute to society, become productive members of their communities, make amends, and improve their lives and those of the people around them.” 

One of the eight appointees is Noble Wray, 66, a career police officer who served as Madison’s police chief from 2004-2013. He was a member of Gov. Evers’ Pardon Advisory Board from 2019-2025 where he reviewed applications, including asking applicants why they believed they merited a pardon. In an interview, he spoke with the Examiner about why he chose to serve on the commutations board and the unique perspective he brings to the role. 

Why did you want to serve on the board?

“In total, I’m 100% in support of commutations,” said Wray. “I think it’s critical for the criminal justice system to have something like this in place.”

On the Pardon Advisory Board, Wray said he was inspired by stories of people who took accountability for their lives and were making meaningful changes.

“I’ve worked or reviewed just about every part of the criminal justice system during my career,” he said, “and nothing has been more personally fulfilling than the pardon board.”

He agreed to be on the Commutation Advisory Board, he said, because he believes people in prison who are trying to make constructive changes to become productive citizens should have an incentive to pursue those changes. He believes it’s important for the state to support  successful reentry into society, focusing on employment, family support, treatment and accessing services.

“Being involved in criminal justice reform for so long and understanding that you can’t just look at a system that has punishment as its only motivation — human beings are more complex than that,” he said. “There are people that we know that can contribute to society, and the system, the structure must provide triggers, must provide systems to acknowledge those folks, both in prison and when they have completed their time.”

But he also acknowledged an applicant might not be ready for a commutation.

“I’m here to tell you, the first to tell you, it may not be for everyone,” he said. “It may be that someone just needs time to think through what they’ve done and to really grasp and understand it. It may be, you know, taking college credits. It may be working while they’re in prison on vocational training.”

What is the importance of the Commutation Advisory Board?

Wray emphasized that the advisory board brings together members  from different backgrounds in the criminal justice and social services system, with diverse experiences, who will challenge one another and offer varied perspectives.

“So you know I support commutations,” he said. “But you know what? I am a cop. I’ve lived my whole life being a cop, and bottom line, I want to make sure that people in the community and out on the streets are safe, that neighborhoods are safe. So if I see something or hear something that I think is going to compromise that, I’m going to push back.”

At the same time, he added, someone who has  a different perspective could see something he doesn’t perceive.

“What I hope we would get out of this is that we really hear what the people are saying that are requesting a commutation,” he said. ”And we really review the information and make the best decision, balancing the need to have a human being get back into Wisconsin society and make a contribution to Wisconsin society, balancing that with ensuring that no one will be harmed in any way, shape or form by this person.”

Asked about the pressure to ensure that the board doesn’t make a bad decision, leading to more harm caused by someone whose sentence is commuted,  Wray drew on his experience  as a police officer. It’s wrong, he said, to treat an entire neighborhood as being made up of criminals when only a few people are causing problems. He said the same standard should be applied to commutations, not letting one person’s bad actions ruin the chances for others who are trying to change their lives.

“Politically, people will get up and say, ‘Hey, this thing failed because one person did this,’” Wray said. “How sad is that when you can help others? Now, again, I understand you can’t place all of the emphasis on helping someone that has done something wrong to society, but if everything is totally punishment, you don’t have a balance” between punishment of the crime and rehabilitation of the offender.  “That’s why the numbers stay the same, because you don’t have a balance,” he added, referring to Wisconsin’s prison population which is on track to break the record set in 2019 of 23,826 people behind bars, many more than the state’s prison system was designed to hold.

Asked if he knew how the advisory board would evaluate applications for those who meet the minimum criteria to apply, Wray said he thought it would be similar to the Pardon Advisory Board, but also noted that there is no official guideline yet.

“We’re supposed to come together and meet and discuss that,” he said, adding that he expects it will involve “exercising some discretion.”

What perspective do you bring to the Commutation Advisory Board?

Wray said his background in law enforcement and his work on other boards will inform his work on the commutation board. 

“My common background being law enforcement, that I spent 30 years attempting to reduce fear, harm and disorder in the Madison area …  that’s really, you know, where it starts,” he said.  “I also bring a perspective of dealing with people at a level that probably no one gets to see other than a police officer, and that is in that hour of need, hour of distress, or when it happens, you’re out there … it’s that intimate time of a crisis or call or problem that very few people will see.”

He added that a police officer has to hold people accountable while also supporting and caring for victims, and “doing it with humility and with practical wisdom. I think that I bring that perspective.”

Wray also noted his experience consulting across the United States and internationally as an expert in police reform, police culture and implicit bias in policing.

“We don’t talk about this, but there is a financial cost to justice,” Wray added, “and if it’s not properly handled, if we’re too focused on arresting and incarcerating people, there is a cost, but there’s also a financial cost if we’re not doing the right thing by keeping communities safe.”

Finally, reflecting on his experience both in law enforcement and in his work on criminal justice reform, Wray said, “I just wish that more people could see when redemption is exercised properly.”

The seven other appointees to the commutation board include Maryann Sumi, a former Dane County Circuit Judge; David Meany, a former Ashland County District Attorney; Jerome Dillard, a criminal justice advocate and former executive director of EXPO (Ex-incarcerated People Organizing); Kathy Byrne Stilling, a former public defender, criminal defense attorney and retired Waukesha County Circuit Judge; Jonathan Scharrer, University of Wisconsin Law School professor and Director of the Restorative Justice Project; Geri Segal, the former executive director of Family Support Center in Chippewa Valley;  and Kat Kasmaule, program and policy analyst for the Wisconsin Department of Children and Families and a former child protection case manager.

The eight will join chair Mel Barnes, Evers’ chief legal counsel, and vice chair Cindy O’Donnell, a corrections veteran.

In 2025, the number of adults in Wisconsin prisons for drunk driving and other Operating While Intoxicated offenses was four times higher than it was in 2000, according to a report published Thursday by the Wisconsin Policy Forum. 

The report describes Wisconsin’s penalties for initial OWI convictions as generally less severe than those in neighboring states, but says Wisconsin has among the most severe penalties for the most serious convictions. 

A record number of 1,313 adults entered the Wisconsin prison system in 2023 for OWI offenses, though declining admissions over the next two years suggest that “they may now be trending downward,” the forum said in its press release. 

In December 2025, 2,750 adults were incarcerated in Wisconsin prisons for OWI offenses, which doesn’t include people incarcerated in local jails for lower-level offenses. People incarcerated for OWIs make up a larger share of people in Wisconsin prisons than they used to, the report found, from about 3% in 2000 to about 12% in 2025. These numbers declined from 2024 to 2025 but remain higher than they once were. Black Wisconsinites and American Indian/Alaska Native Wisconsinites are overrepresented in Wisconsin prisons for OWIs.  

 

From 2020 to 2024, incarceration for OWI offenses rose sharply, the report states. A backlog of OWI cases in the court system, changes in behavior and policies that increased penalties for people who have committed four or more OWI offenses may have contributed to this trend. 

OWI arrest data suggests that Wisconsin may be making fewer arrests for less severe drunk driving and more arrests for severe or repeat offenses, with less arrests overall, the report states. 

The state is facing prison overcrowding and increasing financial and human costs of the prison system and a “relationship with alcohol use that many public health leaders view as problematic,” the report states. 

It lists a series of measures that policymakers could consider to address the problem without increasing incarceration for OWIs. It says these are strategies being used in other states that have been shown to reduce consumption of alcohol or drunk driving. 

Some of these ideas involve more programming:

• State funding for alcohol age compliance check programs 
• More Wisconsin communities implementing a Place of Last Drink program, in which police can identify bars and restaurants where people last consumed alcohol before committing an OWI, aiding local data to address drunk driving
• Creating OWI or hybrid courts that help connect people charged with OWIs to programs or resources that may be more likely to prevent another OWI than a regular sentence, especially in areas where these courts are less common, such as northern Wisconsin. 
• Improving access to substance use programs in Wisconsin prisons by increasing funding
• Giving people better options for alternative transportation after they have consumed alcohol, particularly in rural areas

Other ideas involve new restrictions: 

• Imposing higher taxes on one or more types of alcohol
• Limiting alcohol licenses for retailers, or reduce alcohol permits (Wisconsin has one alcohol outlet per 345 people, the report states,  citing the Medical College of Wisconsin, far above the national average)
• Reducing the legal BAC limit to 0.05% as recommended by the National Transportation Safety Board
• Decreasing the days and hours during which retailers can sell alcohol

Under Wisconsin law, the state Department of Corrections is supposed to make an effort to avoid re-incarcerating people who violate minor terms of their probation, parole or deferred prosecution agreements. But advocates say DOC has not made an adequate effort to create  a system of short-term sanctions that allows people it releases to maintain contact with their families and hold onto their jobs. A rule solidifying DOC’s short-term sanctions policy, which advocates have criticized, goes into effect next month.

Act 196, passed in 2013, laid the groundwork for creating a system of short-term sanctions for people who violate the terms of their release into the community. The sanctions are supposed to provide  accountability and address bad  behavior without returning the person to prison. Roughly one-third of those entering prison each year in Wisconsin are returning because they have violated the terms of community supervision and therefore received  a “technical revocation”.

The 2013 law states that short-term sanctions should “ensure that efforts to minimize the impact on the offender’s employment… and family are made when applying sanctions,” or the sanction, whatever it may be, such as increased requirements to meet with a probation or parole officer, has the minimum impact on the person’s employment and family.

After the law passed, the Department of Corrections was charged with coming up with a framework for the new system of sanctions in the form of an administrative rule.

However, the final draft of a rule approved by Gov. Tony Evers in January, which will become part of the administrative code on July 1, states that the “impact on an offender’s employment… and family” are only “factors (that) may be considered when applying sanctions.”

The final rule provides more flexibility for probation and parole officers in the sanctions they impose. Critics say it fails to meet the law’s intent to ensure those sanctions have minimal impact on employment and family, as explicitly stated in Act 196. In particular, critics say, as long as lengthy jail holds are an approved short-term sanction, up to 90 days for very high level violations, the sanctions could have significant negative effects on both employment and family life.

A 2025 proposed rule, which was the subject of a July 2025 public hearing, contained some of the same language as Act 196, including “ensures that efforts to minimize the impact on an offender’s employment” and “family,” but the final rule removed that language.

Tom Gilbert, a WISDOM volunteer whose son has been in community supervision, has been one of the leading voices urging the DOC to implement the 2013 law. He sent a letter in 2024 to the former Secretary of the DOC, Kevin Carr, and later the current secretary, Jared Hoy, and offered input at the July 2025 public hearing. Gilbert, along with others, criticized the 2025 proposed rule for not capturing the spirit of the law and not offering “new revised policies and practices.”

He also criticized the DOC, saying it had implemented Act 196 by issuing a one-sentence rule in 2019, citing its use of evidence-based response to violations, a system of issuing appropriate sanctions based on the severity of the violation.

“In 2019, the Department quietly promulgated a one-sentence rule that it alleged implemented Act 196,” said Gilbert. “That one sentence did not even begin to address all of the features Act 196 intended to inject into the community corrections operations.” In effect, he added,  “the rule did not commit the DOC to do anything new or different.”

The Wisconsin Examiner made several requests to the DOC to explain why the final rule was written as it is, but received no response.

In a Feb. 27 letter to Hoy, Gilbert criticized the final rule for modifying language protecting ex-offenders’ contact with  employment and family, and noting that the  “short-term sanctions”  in the rule includes 90 days of incarceration.

He also points out that the rule’s stated responses for different levels of violations comes directly from the DOC’s manual on evidence-based response to violations.

“What they’ve done here is just pulled the status quo into the rule to make it sound like they’re now responding and they’ve got something new, but it’s nothing new,” Gilbert told the Examiner.

He noted that 90 days of jail incarceration, while described as a short-term sanction, has  a major impact on employment and families. He suggested if DOC needs a custodial hold, it could be considered for over a weekend, when it wouldn’t disrupt employment and family life as much.

How ‘short term sanctions’ affect people in real life

JenAnn Bauer of West Bend, who is on extended supervision, said even a weekend in jail can have a negative impact. Back in December, she was placed on a weekend hold after she reported to her PO on Wednesday the termination of her employment at a homeless shelter on Tuesday based on an allegation of using excessive physical force on a minor, which reportedly was on videotape. After spending the weekend in jail on a “hold” pending an investigation, and giving a statement to police on a Monday, she was released within hours without being charged.

“I have a little small business and this was around Christmas,” she said. “I had an order that needed to be made and packaged and labeled. I am fortunate that my son got on it for me. I don’t like to say traumatizing because I sometimes feel that that word gets overused, but for lack of a better word it was traumatizing, and I look at it like this — between five and six hours after you took my statement, you did not feel that I was an issue, that I was going to be a problem to the public, so, can I just ask, why didn’t we do that on Wednesday or Thursday? Did I really need to go sit in the county jail for the weekend?”

During the 2025 public hearing a member of MOSES, a nonpartisan interfaith group that promotes social justice and racial equality, submitted an unsigned written comment stating that the 2025 proposed rule “leaves the door open to revocation for minor violations like substance use. Individuals with minor violations are needlessly filling our jails and prisons. They do not receive treatment that could help them. They are prevented from continued employment and support for their families.”

In a report to the Legislature, the DOC provided a response to several of the written comments, saying that the department “strives to use the least restrictive alternative when responding to violations, which holds clients accountable while reducing the likelihood of future violations and criminal behavior. The DOC uses evidence-based response approaches equipping clients to be successful in the community to resolve issues at the lowest level because of the known impact jail sanctions have on employment, school and family responsibilities.”

The DOC’s Evidence-Based Response to Violation (EBRV) manual, which the DOC currently uses to determine sanctions, allows up to 90 days of jail time for those who have a “very high” violation and up to 20 days for a “medium” violation.

A 2024 report by the Robert M. La Follette School of Public Affairs, University of Wisconsin-Madison noted the number of revocations began to decline in 2021 after the EBRV had been fully implemented in 2019. However, a 2023 Legislative Audit Bureau report of the Community Correction Program revealed that of 79 individuals in community supervision interviewed, 59% said the short-term sanctions they received didn’t consider their employment needs, and 64.7 % said sanctions didn’t consider family obligations.

Sean Wilson, a senior director of organizing and partnership at Dream.Org, a national social justice advocacy group, also spoke at the 2025 public hearing and is critical of the final rule.

“While the proposed rules introduce categories of violations and outline possible responses, they still fall short of what the Legislature required under Act 196,” Wilson said.  “The law was intended to create a clear, structured system of short-term sanctions that would reduce reliance on incarceration. Instead, these guidelines present options without establishing standards. They do not ensure that the Department of Corrections errs on the side of protecting employment, supporting family stability, or reducing unnecessary incarceration. As written, the rules create alternatives to revocation but do not require their use.”

Jeremy Dings, who was in community supervision and experienced two revocations, also spoke at the 2025 public hearing. While in community supervision in 2007, he was sent back to prison because of  a violation and was still locked up when his mother passed away.

“If there were considerations about how that’s my family, it would have allowed me to stay with my loved ones and mom, who was suffering with these cancer issues,” he said

Ding acknowledges that over the years, he has witnessed how the DOC has given more consideration to employment for those in community corrections than it used to. “It used to be your problem if you lost your employment,” he said. “In fact, back in 2010, 2011, 2012, it was common practice and almost seen as this is how we get back at you, by you losing your employment.”

But Ding also agrees with Gilbert that as long as the DOC considers 90 days in jail a short-term sanction it will result in major ramification for those in community supervision.

“And so it’s obvious that a 90-day sanction is going to end somebody’s employment almost no matter what, and it would be great if those who are in probation and parole would consider someone’s employment and also their connection to their family and the responsibilities they have for their family, too,” he said.

Mark Rice, transformational justice coordinator for WISDOM, is also critical of the language in the final rule.

“The new rule still enables the DOC to utilize the response of up to 90 days in jail,” said Rice, “and then they changed the language from the original Act 196 when the original Act 196 uses the word ‘ensures’ that efforts would minimize the impact on a person’s employment and ‘ensures’ that the sanction would minimize the impact on a person’s family and employment, and they’ve changed that to me, so that it’s optional.”

Two holds, 17 days of jail, employment and family life impacted

In April and then later in May, Segdrick Leslie Farley, 46, of Eau Claire, who is on parole after serving 21 years in prison for second-degree intentional homicide, said he spent 17 cumulative days in jail while investigations were pending that later cleared him. The holds harmed his business, Brighter than Sunshine, he said, interrupted his education and disrupted his family life. He questions why other measures couldn’t have been taken to address the allegations instead of disrupting his life.

Farley, a college graduate who is pursuing graduate school, said he was put on a seven-day hold in April based on what he describes as a baseless allegation that he threatened another person. 

“My mental health was declining,” he said about his hold. “I was just worried, you know, worrying about my kids. I couldn’t talk to my kids because I didn’t want them to know that I was in jail.”

He said on the sixth day in jail his PO came to talk to him. Farley said he was angry because he had missed an opportunity to participate in summer research and missed an opportunity to secure educational funding.

“What I said to my agent at the time is just, ‘Did you really need to lock me up like, corrupt my life, interrupt my life, and cause all of this, when you could have simply just asked me the question?’”

And then on May 27, he was placed on hold again, this time for 10 days, after he made a report to police of a man trespassing on his property. The man arrested claimed Farley had waved a firearm, which, as a felon, Farley is not allowed to possess.

Farley was again put in a hold while his residence was searched. He said it could have been resolved by asking him for his key to search his house, even if he was put in hold for a day, instead of for 10 days and his landlord having to open his residence.

“It was embarrassing because my landlord had to come down and I might lose my place. He might think I’m some type of thug,” he said.  “Nothing was found because I don’t have firearms, I don’t do things like that,” and added, “I was fortunate enough to have somebody pay my rent for me. I was fortunate enough to have someone pay them (the employees), but my kids had to go without me. I lost income. I lost time that I should have spent preparing for my summer research in school, which is going to get me into graduate school and law school. I was supposed to be studying for the LSAT. I can’t take those days back. Even when I come home, there’s no apology that restores any of that.”