April 25, 2010

Rehabilitation Programs Division Director
Texas Department of Criminal Justice
PO Box 99
Huntsville, TX 77342

Dear [Director],

Thank you for your letter of 3/16/10 in response to Friends’ concern for Indian inmates at C T Terrell Unit in Rosharon, TX. As you probably know, following an appeal to the Texas Commission for Criminal Justice, Baltimore Monthly Meeting of Friends, Stony Run, received a letter dated 2/26/10 from its chairman, Oliver J. Bell, which, in our view, agrees in principle with the substance of our appeal on behalf of Indian friends at Rosharon, that is, that the TDCJ will accommodate a Native American religious organization at C. T. Terrell Unit. Your letter confirms in my mind TDCJ’s commitment to accommodation in principle for the free practice of Native American spirituality, presumably within the framework that certain Indian inmates there have lately proposed. It is my purpose in writing to you to make further progress towards accommodation in fact, a condition which does not yet appear to have been achieved.

Before making any further submissions, I would like to establish with your office my standing in this service. First and foremost, I have been named by the congregation of Native American devotees at C T Terrell Unit, Roaming Buffalo Clan, as their agent, and I have been given this commission in writing. Second, I have the corporate support of my own congregation. This corporate support was confirmed by minute at our Meeting for Business at its regular monthly meeting on 1/3/10, and the Meeting Clerk’s letter 1/25/10 to Chairman Bell offers to introduce me “to inmates, officials and Friends in Texas as one familiar with the condition of Indian inmates and as one active in the concern for Native American devotees in our state and federal prisons.” I offer these bona fides so that you will appreciate that mine is not a casual, personal, or passing interest. Having once encouraged these Indian brothers to combine and hearing from them that they met stiff resistance to what your Department has now confirmed are legitimate aspirations, I feel myself under the weight of an obligation to do what I can to see that this Hoop be well established. I am, as you might imagine, in regular correspondence with the chief person of this Hoop. Recently, I have asked him to keep me informed approximately monthly of their condition. His latest report is not encouraging.

Your letter 3/16/10 acknowledges difficulties - “challenges” - that your Department faces in making adequate provisions for these and other Native American devotees, which I can appreciate; and it reiterates limitations imposed upon them by TDCJ policy directives, copies of which I have been provided. I am willing, at this time, to work towards – and to encourage my Indian friends accept as accommodation-in-fact - conditions at C T Terrell Unit within bounds of these official guidelines, but to their widest latitudes. Given that the legal standard for the burden of their religious practice is “least restrictive means”, this seems to me neither too much to ask nor too much to expect. The expectation that a mutual understanding on your part would prompt would be, in my view, for your office to see how much can be done for these men in this dimension of their prison life rather than how little within the guidelines, which seems to have been a prevailing mood for some months past. Fortunately for all of us, there is a ready mechanism for assessing progress in this concern. This is a “results-based” exercise. Written formulations are not conclusive. Whatever is said in print must be visibly and tangibly demonstrated and sustained by the men and by the staff at the Unit.

I would like to suggest to you that, while I am an agent for these men and their advocate, my relations with your office are collegial. I hope to offer you as well as Indian friends an alternative to the adversarial approaches that often characterize inmate-institution relations. While I may sometimes refer to legal principles, for example, I am unwilling at any time to support or even to suggest any legal action by these men against TDCJ inasmuch as I would be unable to do so and remain consistent with Friends’ principles of peacemaking. Rather, I am bound to speak positively to these men in favor of your just institutional goals, even your means and ends for the most part. I have already, in fact, suggested to them that their ‘strategy’ be to arrange and conduct themselves so that they can begin to approach the full accommodation for their traditional spirituality as is now provided for in policy and procedure directives. Also, I have advised them that the limits of their accommodation are, in some ways, contingent upon their own actions, that basically, TDCJ programs are “behavioral” models: desired action is positively reinforced with more latitude; undesired action is negatively reinforced with less.

Now, with your letter to me of 3/16/10 and their most recent one to me 4/3/10 laid side by side, shortfalls between accommodation in principle and accommodation in fact are readily apparent, if one were to confirm these reported conditions:

• Open dialogue in weekly meetings is censored. Inmates are barred from ‘teaching’ and time limits on speakers are superimposed. A “Christian volunteer” is not allowed to ‘teach’. An outsider is presumed necessary for performance of ceremonies and other religious functions.

• The chaplain does not have the trust or confidence of the men. He is regarded as non-responsive, abrupt, and summarily dismissive of their own inquiries and appeals. Reportedly, grievances “disappear” or simply go unanswered and efforts to organize are suppressed with warnings of reductions of scheduled activities.

• Material provisions and their storage are inadequate. Sacred herbs are not available, their provision not assured. Inadequate storage facility is made the occasion for confiscations.

• Sacraments have been denied for “6 – 8 months”. There is no Pipe. Ceremonies are not performed.

• Perfunctory citation of “security” is used to justify questionable or arbitrary restrictions, to stifle expression, to deflect inquiries.

Director, I have been witness to more than a few Native American Hoops in both state and federal prisons. This is simply not how even minimally accommodated ones report themselves. It is, however, consistent with examples elsewhere of how rules are enforced with an intention to minimize rather than to maximize religious program opportunities for Indian inmates. Inasmuch as “least restrictive means” is a “strict scrutiny” standard, it would seem to be incumbent upon you to maintain a close watch upon program development at C T Terrell Unit until this situation improves and stabilizes.

I have not included in this list of current grievances restrictions that might well be tolerable but are contrary to the letter of current TDCJ policies and guidelines, such as the possession of “dream-catchers”, decoration of medicine bags, etc. I note, however, that some of these conditions are the same that I reported to Chairman Bell in my letter 1/26/10 so that while some burdens appear to have been lifted, others, it would seem, remain. Certainly, my Indian friends still feel much aggrieved; and that is something that is not, I can say from experience, an inevitable product of men’s confinement but something that is, as often as not, reflexive of a frustration with inadequate address of spiritual needs.

It cannot escape notice that some of these men’s complaints have been addressed since Friends appealed to your Department so that conditions have lately improved somewhat at C T Terrell Unit, and we are all grateful for that; however, one thing that this indicates to me is that your office recognized that these grievances were legitimate. I see every reason to suppose, therefore, that with further effort on your part, we will be able to see that more improvement can be made.

One item of particular interest to me is the whereabouts of the ten sets of organizational and educational materials in red folders that I sent some time ago together with the dozen or so books that were lately approved and placed in the prison library. Your letter does not say whether these materials were approved, disapproved, impounded or discarded; however, my Indian friends say they have not yet seen them and I have been obliged to send one copy to their chief person. Before I make additional copies, I would like to know, first, that they will not be redundant and second, that they will be admitted to the institution, safely stored and readily available.

I would also like to know if any material provisions such as sacred herbs are needed and if they can be properly kept and what immediate provisions there are for sacramental tobacco to be provided to these men, either for “prayer ties” or for a Pipe ceremony.

Thank you for your consideration of this submission.

Yours truly, William O. Miles

April 7, 2010

Oliver J. Bell, Chairman
Texas Board of Criminal Justice
PO Box 13084
Austin, TX 78711

Dear Oliver J. Bell,

Thank you for your letter 2/26/10 addressing the Meeting’s concern for Indian inmates at C. T. Terrell Unit in Rosharon, TX, and for the copies of your departments policies covering the practices of Native American devotees held in custody by TDCJ.

It is my sense of your letter that you agree in principle with the substance of our appeal on behalf of Indian friends at Rosharon, that is, that the TDJC will accommodate a Native American religious organization at C. T. Terrell Unit, presumably within the framework that certain Indian inmates there have lately proposed, which were submitted to your office. This framework expressly provides that the Hoop accepts that all of its activities shall be conducted openly under the oversight of the Warden, with direct supervision by the chaplain and/or other offices under control of the Warden, and that it shall make no policies or “by-laws” of its own contrary to the good order of the Institution.

The Meeting is grateful for your understanding and this positive and constructive response to Friends’ appeal. It is our hope that Native American devotees at C.T. Terrell Unit will - within a short period of time - be able, in fact, to act as a congregation for the faith and practice of traditional Native American spirituality and to provide mutual support for the increase of understanding and free practice of Native American religion in good order within the confines of the Institution. We remain open to them, and to you, in expectation of the fulfillment of these aspirations within the limits of your current policies.

Regarding Native American religious practice in general currently within TDJC: we appreciate the acute difficulties in locating and recruiting volunteers to support Indian inmates in their spiritual discipline and religious programs. While it would appear that direct support of any program on-site in Rosharon by a member of our Meeting is beyond our present capacity, we will do what we can to inform others of the ever-present need there. We would encourage your staff to understand that there is a great deal that can be accomplished by the men themselves from their own reservoirs of experience. Friends have witnessed on many occasions how peaceably spiritually-motivated and self-disciplined men can conduct themselves, even within the confines of prison institutions.

Thank you again for your agency in improving the condition of these men.

Yours truly,
Frederick J. Leonard, Clerk