Dear Editor,

Correctional Industries (C.I) provides jobs and skill training for inmates at the correctional facilities administered by the Department of Corrections. These jobs provide employment and a modest income for the inmates, a skill that is transferable when seeking employment once released, and provides a savings to the taxpayers in the products they produce. I served as the General Manager for C.I. at the WSP until budget cuts resulted in the loss of my job back in 2010, so I am familiar with the local operations.

I question then, why C.I. is closing the Garment and Sign shops, at the Washington State Penitentiary? This action will eliminate not only the state employee's jobs that manage these shops, but the inmates' jobs as well. The sign shop makes signs for a wide range of state agencies such as the Department of Transportation, cities, counties and even federal agencies, at a tremendous savings to the taxpayers. It becomes even more curious when you consider the fact that C.I. has contractual obligations with their customers, that they apparently are ready and willing to breach, thus increasing the cost to taxpayers.

This should be looked into by the legislative oversight committee's in both the House and Senate, to thoroughly examine the actions being instituted by C.I. I know that we are in hard economic times and that the State is experiencing some severe budgetary cuts. However, to cut an enterprise that makes money for the state, and who is contractually obligated to proved a product to its customers, needs, in my opinion, a close examination. If budgetary cuts are under consideration by C.I., they might take a close look at their 4 top administrators who are paid over a $100,000 each. I would think that by reducing the number of production shops they are responsible for "managing", we might be able to get by with fewer administrator....or is that unreasonable?

I wrote to Rep. Maureen Walsh and Rep. Terry Nealey as well as Sen. Mike Hewitt several weeks ago about this issue. The only one to respond was Rep. Walsh. I am surprised that the other two have not responded since this affects jobs in their respective districts. This is, however, an election year, so maybe they have more important agenda items to take care of than securing jobs for their constituents and saving taxpayers' money. So thank you, Rep. Walsh, for at least taking this matter under consideration and we'll have to wait and see how this finally unravels.

Dain C. Nysoe

Dayton, WA