However, the Community Resource for Justice report, which makes a compelling case for immediate reforms within the Department of Correction, should provide an incentive to revisit the idea of an advisory board. There is value in having advisory boards, specially to public entities facing unique challenges whose solutions require input from a spectrum of viewpoints. A number of such advisory boards serve valuable functions. Our lieutenant governor performs valuable service by finding answers to vital policy questions as a member of the Federal Trade Commission's Advisory Committee on Online Access and Security. Its necessary preoccupation with securing prison walls can distract the department from its equally important duties to rehabilitate and reduce recidivism.
Observers routinely confront impenetrable barriers when advocating for change.
An advisory board, consisting of members from government and the private sector with varying areas of expertise, would help ensure that our half-billion dollar prison program releases inmates who have been given the opportunity to prepare for freedom. Conversely, by remaining insulated from the advice of others, the department reduces the likelihood that ex-prisoners wil return. Opponents of an advisory board cite cost of the board and programmatic recommendations the board may promulgate. To the contrary, an advisory board is designed to save taxpayer dollars. Victims of crime also bear the financial and emotional cost of crimes committed by released inmates who were given little opportunity to prepare for life outside of prison.