Successful SO re-entry program in Texas in jeopardy from TX Parole Board

By Sandy . . . New Name Ministries, a faith-based organization, is headquartered in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area. The past fifteen years have seen the community safe residential re-entry program for sex offenders grow from a fledgling pioneer in sex offender re-entry to a well-respected organization recognized as experts in sex offender residential re-entry.

Having served hundreds of former sexual offenders over these years, the founder and CEO Pastor Jon Corderio says that with the grace of God, not a single one of the men New Name Ministries has served has ever been accused of a new sexual offense.

All of this is now being threatened by the Texas Department of Pardons and Paroles.

On Dec. 18th due to seemingly secret and still unpublished changes in parole policy, all New Name Ministries (NNM) facilities in Tarrant and Wise County were removed from TDCJ’s Alternate Housing Resource (AHR) lists without any prior warning or being given any opportunity to address deficiencies or correct issues. AHRs are private facilities operated without taxpayer funding.

The issue has to do with the number of men allowed per bedroom and per house. The written policy is, “Adequate living space per offender,” but now a limit of two men per bedroom and a maximum of seven per home has been arbitrarily set regardless of the size of the home or of the rooms. NNM brought their homes into compliance immediately upon being told of the new rules, but they were told that they must now reapply for inclusion on the list of acceptable alternate housing.

Appeals to both the regional and the assistant regional directors have gone unanswered.

Twenty of the current residents are under parole supervision, and they have been given 30 days to move out of their homes, some as early as January 15th. They have been told to provide their new addresses immediately or else be put on the state-funded halfway house list. This means men who are well-established and employed there risk being moved as far away as El Paso. Most of these 20 men are employed although very few have vehicles or adequate resources to locate housing or live on their own.

Legal counsel has advised against contacting governmental representatives, fearing that this would be seen as an opportunity to create further-reaching legislation that would give the Texas Department of Parole more power and promote more state-run halfway houses at taxpayers’ expense. This will affect not only those on the sexual offense registry but all of those being released on parole in Texas.

Concerned citizens, family members, and friends are being asked to take action by contacting Parole Director Pamela Thielke (8610 Shoal Creek Blvd, Austin, TX 7875; Phone: (512) 406-5401; Fax: (512) 406-5858) and encouraging her to intervene and implement a more reasonable approach to correcting alternative housing resource issues. You may also contact New Name Ministries,, with offers of help in the form of donations, rooms to rent in the Ft. Worth area, or the loan or donation of an RV.

Registered citizens on parole face a myriad of difficulties and obstacles to re-entry. Organizations such as New Name Ministries, with proven track records of compassion and success, are essential to this process and doubly essential as they operate without any cost to the taxpayer.

The state of Texas and the Board of Pardons and Parole should be doing all it can to facilitate the continued success of this vital re-entry program. To impede it in any way for any period of time is in no one’s best interest.

Help us reach more people by Sharing or Liking this post.

Sandy Rozek

Sandy is communications director for NARSOL, editor-in-chief of the Digest, and a writer for the Digest and the NARSOL website. Additionally, she participates in updating and managing the website and assisting with a variety of organizational tasks.

  • This topic has 18 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 years ago by Avatarsaddles.
Viewing 9 reply threads
  • Author
    • #50418 Reply

      I’m with you on this except for your last sentence “…… is in no one’s best interest.”
      Someone has an interest else changes wouldn’t flow. So the question becomes WHO? Follow to money and you’re sure to find out.

      • #50431 Reply
        Sandy Rozek
        Sandy Rozek

        I guess it depends on your interpretation of the word “best.” In this instance I meant best with the same meaning as “best practices,” conveying the idea of not only proven to be superior but also proven to be the most effective for the most people. Certainly a financial motive leaps out, but that would appear to be greed-driven, and that would not be consistent with superior or effective for the most people.

        • #50462 Reply

          Sandy you write well and your emphasis upon the necessity for sound reintegration policy, no matter the provider, is paramount in eliminating recidivism and right on. Efficacy and efficiency are important, but normally succumb to economics. That is a problem we all face, daily. I read recently about a freeze in federal employees wages, it reads, ” This is just pouring salt into the wound. ” said Tony Reardon, President of the National Treasury Employees Union.
          The freeze effects almost exactly the same number of fed. workers as there are registrants. We’ll see how much they can tolerate salt. SOR was sold as a state program when indeed it was federal imposing unilateral beliefs upon the whole of the states, yes ratified by each but fed at heart. Scapegoats for burgeoning Surveillance Saints.

    • #50421 Reply

      Another example of how the registry destroys rather than rebuilds. These draconian laws are crazy.

    • #50435 Reply
      MARK S.

      If anyone does not realize it, parole boards DO NOT WANT SUCCESS. It is about numbers, saving face, what looks good on paper, and of course $$$$$$$ If you think this commener is full of baloney, investigate for yourself and find the truth.

      • #50470 Reply
        Sandy Rozek
        Sandy Rozek

        If you are talking to me, Mark, I do not in the least think he is full of baloney. I know full well it is about the money. I have known that for a long, long time. My earlier comment was intended only to explain within what context I used the term “in anyone’s best interest.”

        I wrote this several years ago and posted it on my “Shelly Stow” blog; it’s ALL about the money.

    • #50457 Reply

      I think this is nothing but a spite move. The effectiveness of the program is unwelcomed. No one in the state REALLY wants sex offenders to reintegrate and have any semblance of a normal life. This is one of those, “Everything’s going too smoothly here. These offenders are way too content and comfortable. We’ve got to end that now!” situations. When they spring a change at the last possible minute and then refuse to give anyone any extra time and ignore the facility’s attempt to address the issues, that tells you someone has it in their mind to destroy the program just because they can’t stand to see successful registrants. It goes against the narrative and proves that many jobs in the parole department aren’t really necessary. They need to throw these registrants into chaos so that they can start issuing violations of supervision, registry violations, residency violations, etc.

      • #50464 Reply
        MARK S

        WC-TN: You are pretty close!!!!Especially the very last sentence of your comment, starting at “It goes……..”

        • #50473 Reply

          Thanks, Mark! Something smells about that situation. This program may be making the state look bad by doing more to actually help registered citizens than the state. Either way it shows the low regard for the welfare of these individuals and no proper due process for even those who would extend a helping hand to registrants. If all these actions don’t speak to an overarching punitive regime, than nothing does.

      • #50483 Reply
        MARK S.

        Thank you Sandy but I was not directly talking to you. But I thank you also for the link!!

        • #50484 Reply
          MARK S.

          Kudos……….And I agree whole-hardheartedly with you comment………..

    • #50472 Reply

      Mark, WC, I do like all this rational reasoning on here. This comments on this topic in TX are good. Makes one think twice about going into the criminal justice field which is what I did. Sometimes I wonder if the probation people or criminal just system can can justify themselves in these matters. Very good points. Now if our lives were based on point systems well, I’m sure, a lot of people have already blown it. Myself included

      The problem I see in all this probation and parole is recognization. Now the reason I came to NARSOL in the first place is the word “Rational”. Speaking out for this ordeal we all go thru is very important and if the whole foundation is not laid out right its going to crumble.

      The whole content of this matter has a racial slant to it of a sex slant nature, wheth4er one is caught with their pants down or caught up not controling his or her mouth. Now we can all get angry over this thing but we shouldn’t be angry without a cause, so their is principal involved. A lot of this sex offender stuff if really bleak when one wants to set you up than shut you out. I wonder who has the bad mouth today in government.

    • #50482 Reply

      Oops correction, I almost went into corrections. after a few semesters in college I felt that wasn’t my style since most of the police officers I had classes with knew me. Course this was back in the mid to late 70s. A lot of them knew me already from my high school and collage days. But folks all this sex offender stuff is very serious and so is prole and probation. Its no one week stay in the drunk tank or getting pinched for weed. Sure we all have to walk on thin ice but when a paroble board gets the word to make changes in parole status just like you all said something is diffently wrong.

      Now NARSOL and others have taken on a good effort for all of us to fight this thing as it even effects first amendment rights inalienable rights and a lot of this leaves up up the creek without a paddle so I have to appreciate NARSOL and all those involved in all this. Something is very wrong when a parole board wants to down a double jeeparady thing on one’s rights and screw with one’s good time. Too much of a headache for me. Dang I had enough time just waking up in jail over being drunk. That was many years ago in the 70’s.

      • #50504 Reply

        Well some of us have a paddle, but where to use it when those steering are moving toward making our government ” for and by the people” into a form that places “machine need” above human need. America degrades itself and naturally the people follow. They hand out stupid felonies to non violent folks on the regular. If it is true that justice demands felonization then the making must be not merely accurate but also valid in effect. To presume synonyms: sufficient and necessary is plain reckless and deleterious to liberty in every case. History may show his choice (J.G.R.) was the match that started the fire that burnt the house to the ground. Remember the Roman Empire collapsed under similar conditions. And if it does what is left but big firms, big databases, and big killing machines waiting to be unleashed.

    • #50502 Reply

      Frankly I’m not surprised by this. There are separate rules and terms for registrant parolees and probationers specifically to ensure failure and that the registrant spends the entire parole/probation period running in and out of jail/prison. THAT is the purpose of those rules. Of course they’re going to change if too many registrants manage to survive (or, God forbid, prosper) under them.

      Funny how “Legal counsel has advised against contacting governmental representatives, fearing that this would be seen as an opportunity to create further-reaching legislation…” How so? The Parole Board are not legislators. Let them try to get this absurdity written into law – contact your own legislators with the financial numbers and efficiency of New Name Ministries, a PRIVATE organization such legislation apparently attempts to dismantle (honestly, can anyone name one service the government provides that isn’t done 100 times better, more efficiently, and cost effective by private industry, where applicable?).

      Maybe I’m overly cynical, but it seems to me that whatever legal counsel advised against contacting governmental representatives did so because doing so is free, you can talk to them in plain English, and sometimes it works. Guessing that same counsel advised to hire them at $300-$500 an hour, you won’t hear from them until they want more money, and they can’t promise results. Every lawyer I’ve ever known takes ten times more cases than they can handle, don’t do anything in any of them except ask for continuance, and forget why half their clients hired them in the first place.

    • #50512 Reply

      I rest my case, I know someone fiddled in Rome…… I rest my case Tim. I always like to start off the New Years with a positive feeling and I know Robin’s right in there with us all. This sex offender issue and a lot of this is a bit much to swallow. I’m sure we all look for positive things in this New Year. …. Happy New Year.

    • #50518 Reply
      Capt Charles Robert Munsey Jr.

      This is just another example of restrictions being established with zero research to determine the effects if the restrictions. Brevard County Florida is another example of an ordinance being put in place with basically no redeeming purpose. They are ‘politician feel-good’ restrictions.

    • #50567 Reply

      @Captr. Charles. I am impressed it sounds now we all are making sense out of all this type of miscarage of Justice. Even Tim says he has the paddle. My cousin’s live in the Pompano beach area and as for myself they can have Florida but that is not the point. You also mentioned about the redeaming purposes.

      Sure these ordinances are a bit unfathomable. Even myself when I did my festivals as a vendor, in different counties of VA I had to go to each county sheriff or state police and check in as they say. Well after I complained to my probationer he always gave me the seneiro that it is for public safety and held that up to one, which at times caused me to be late for setting up for the events.

      I can see no redeaming quality or purpose with this ordinance and I wonder what the constitution said when it said .. Congress shall make no new law’s of the free rights of others. I wonder who’s running amuck on a lot of this tresspass against one. When government forces one to violate one’s conscience than all should be upset or alarmed. It makes hardship for all.

      Should we all lose rights in many cases by being set up in the first place. One could even say, well don’t those in government set up drug dealers but two wrongs don’t make a right and we are talking about the Consitution of the United States which can be unconstutional in many cases. Remember I’m not too good with Government and ethic laws of this type.

Viewing 9 reply threads
Reply To: Successful SO re-entry program in Texas in jeopardy from TX Parole Board
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points provided that they stay on topic - keeping in mind...

  • *You must be 18 or older to comment.
  • *You must check the "I am not a robot" box and follow the recaptcha instructions.
  • *Your submission must be approved by a NARSOL moderator.
  • *Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • *Comments arguing about political or religious preferences will be deleted.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Stay on topic.
  • *Do not post contact information for yourself or another person.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.

Your information:

<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre class=""> <em> <strong> <del datetime="" cite=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">