POLITICAL REPRESENTATION HAS BEEN A STAPLE of the California prison system for more than 40 years. Like citizens in the free world, residents of prison communities elect representatives from among their peers to advocate for issues such as better health care, food and nutrition, and living conditions.
However, allegations of rigged elections and forced removal of representatives have always plagued this system, which is named the Incarcerated Persons Advisory Council. Inside San Quentin Rehabilitation Center, it is causing residents to question the integrity of their representatives and what effect that has on legitimate efforts toward reform at the prison.
“We had a clear recall of one of our representatives and that person was not removed from office,” said Giovanni Gladden, who has been incarcerated 22 years. “This guy was promoted and given a greater voice over matters concerning our health and welfare and that is unacceptable.”
Gladden has filed a complaint with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Office of Internal Affairs in Sacramento. A former representative himself, he alleges that the prison is turning a blind eye to election and recall processes and thereby helping facilitate a “puppet council” that is not representing the voice of the incarcerated population.
The IPAC is a legislatively recognized quasi-governmental body of incarcerated individuals elected to advise and communicate issues of concern on behalf of their population to prison administrators. They operate similarly to local community advisory boards.
Formerly known as the Inmate Advisory Council or Men’s Advisory Council, this group acts as a communication liaison facilitating communication between the warden, his staff, and the incarcerated population. They are tasked with bringing proposals and recommendations to improve the quality of life in the prison community.
These councils consist of a general elected body of representatives who help communicate concerns in their housing units. There is also an executive body, which consists of a chairman, vice chairman, secretary, sergeant at arms and a parliamentarian. They are charged with taking resident concerns from the general body to the warden and his designees.
The general body is structured based on the ethnic makeup of the incarcerated community. The executive body is chosen from the general body.
How inmate councils are meant to work
California’s Code of Regulations contains clear guidelines for conducting fair elections and recall processes for the IPAC.
“During the month of July, I became increasingly aware of our housing unit’s dissatisfaction with our IPAC representative,” said Marquise Smith, who has been incarcerated for 18 years. “A broad consensus established that he is not in regular communication with his constituents and cannot properly represent us.”
Smith took it upon himself to initiate a recall and gathered signatures to recall this representative from the general body.
But when Smith turned the signatures in for the recall of the representative, the votes came up missing. Two names of proposed candidates provided to prison administrators, to replace the recalled representative, were also rejected, according to Smith.
“I joined the (IPAC) to help my community. I have the ability to help mediate problems based on my leadership experiences in the outside world.”
Kenny Rogers, former San Quentin IPAC representative
Kenny Rogers was the acting parliamentarian around the time of the recall. Incarcerated for 20 years, Rogers has been an IPAC member for most of his time in prison. He has been a representative at San Quentin since 2018.
“I joined the (IPAC) to help my community,” he said. “I have the ability to help mediate problems based on my leadership experiences in the outside world.”
Rogers said that he was a Boy Scout leader for 13 years, and worked as an assistant fire chief and a chairman of a local water and sewer district where he resided. As a parliamentarian for IPAC, his duties included resolving questions and controversies about the Constitution and bylaws. But that is what he said caused him trouble.
“When I brought violations of the bylaws to leadership’s attention, including prison administrators, I was targeted for removal,” he said.
Rogers was removed as parliamentarian and taken off all of his subcommittee responsibilities. His job allegedly went to the recalled representative.
“They’re not adhering to IPAC bylaws, they’re not allowing certain incarcerated individuals to run for positions, non-elected individuals are occupying executive body positions, and people who should be removed as representatives are being promoted.”
A statewide pattern of distrust
Unfortunately, this is not a new phenomenon. IPACs across California’s prison system have gained a reputation for rigging elections, bartering away positions, and failing to represent their incarcerated constituents.
In January 2025, several individuals from the Central California Women’s Facility sent a letter to the editor of San Quentin News. In the letter, they accused their IPAC representatives of “elitism and monopolizing power positions” for self-serving reasons. They complained that they were fed up with “inmate-staff cronyism.” A survey conducted at CCWF revealed that 72% of the population sampled, believed that the IPAC doesn’t have their backs.
“The prison administration finds it acceptable for executive body members to self-serve and pursue their own personal agendas, rather than advocate for the prison community,” said Rogers.
Evidence of poor representation from IPAC members can be traced back to the 1970s and ’80s. Dorsey Nunn, the co-founder of All of Us or None, an Oakland-based nonprofit focused on reforming prisons, talks about this representative body in his newly released book, “What Kind of Bird Can’t Fly.”
“I started paying attention to what the MAC leadership was up to and I didn’t like what I saw,” he said. “They were almost all white and it seemed to me that they were there out of self-interest. They were managing up, trying to put a gold star on their prison resumes and score themselves an easier path to release. The stuff they pushed for didn’t exactly rock the boat. Can we organize a dance? Can we have a Mother’s Day brunch?”
Gladden now wants the IPAC dismantled. He believes that new elections should be held to create a new body of legitimate representatives to amplify the concerns of the incarcerated community and protect the integrity of ongoing reform efforts at San Quentin.
In March 2023, Gov. Gavin Newsom first announced the transformation of the prison. Since that time, the prison’s name has been changed from San Quentin State Prison to San Quentin Rehabilitation Center and a $239 million education center has been undergoing construction. It is set to open in 2026.
Reform vision clashes with reality
CDCR Secretary Jeff Macomber has also defined a new “California model” for prison reform and introduced four pillars of the model: normalization, dynamic security, peer support and trauma- informed care. Normalization is defined as aiming to bring life in prison as close as possible to life outside of prison, to make it easier for transition back into the community.
“The California model requires a massive change in how prisons operate, how employees interact with both each other and incarcerated people, and how safe and engaged incarcerated people feel in our care. It’s a monumental task, but it’s one that has already started,” Macomber wrote on CDCR’s website.
“If we want to operate like normal society, we have to change how IPAC operates and make sure that they are fairly elected and serving the people.”
Giovanni Gladden, 22-year San Quentin Rehabilitation Center resident
If the model is to flourish inside San Quentin, then life inside should probably reflect a life in a free society, where the cornerstone of democracy is a well-informed citizenry making informed voting decisions, engaging in civic participation and peaceful transitions of power. But that is not what’s currently happening, according to Gladden and others. He now believes IPAC should be subject to legislative oversight.
“If self-appointed, self-serving representatives are bullying their way into positions, we can’t change the culture of prisons and create a better system,” said Gladden. “If we want to operate like normal society, we have to change how IPAC operates and make sure that they are fairly elected and serving the people.”
Steve Brooks is a California Local News Fellow with Bay City News Foundation, reporting from inside San Quentin Rehabilitation Center. His perspective gives readers insight into issues and news from inside the prison. See more of his work at Inside/Out on Local News Matters.