Windham’s legislative delegation and the Maine Department of Corrections have made amends, following an outcry last month regarding a proposed 72-bed women’s re-entry facility on River Road.

On Feb. 9, the department presented the Windham Planning Board a sketch plan for the $10 million, 24,000-square-foot building to be located on prison property. On Feb. 20, Sen. Bill Diamond, Rep. Mark Bryant and Rep. Patrick Corey sent an open letter to Commissioner Joseph Fitzpatrick, complaining that the department had not notified the delegation or the community of its plans. Diamond and Bryant are Democrats; Corey is a Republican.

In response, the department scheduled three public information sessions this month and also gave the delegation a tour of the Maine Correctional Center, in order to highlight the need for the new facility. The response to date appears to have satisfied the members of the Windham delegation, despite their contention in February that the department’s “communication and consideration for local citizens” had “been seriously lacking.”

“I am very pleased that the commissioner responded this way and agreed to have these meetings and agreed to respond to any concerns,” Diamond said. “I think the department did a good job at this. Like the commissioner said, it was an oversight on their part. He 100 percent agreed that this should be a public process.”

The first two public hearings, on March 18 and March 21 at the Windham Town Council chambers, are an opportunity for the public to ask questions and raise concerns about the facility. At the third meeting, scheduled for March 28 at Windham High School, department officials will comprehensively respond to questions and concerns, according to Scott Fish, a department spokesman. According to Fish, Commissioner Fitzpatrick, Director of Operations Gary LaPlante, Maine Correctional Center Warden Scott Landry, and Amanda Woolford, the department’s director of women’s services, will attend the meetings.

“It’s a way for the department to establish two-way communication among members of the public and members of the department, and they’re just going to show people who attend their plans for the new women’s center and explain why it’s a good idea,” Fish said. “It’s an opportunity for the public to come in and find out first hand what the department has in mind for the facility and ask questions and get answers.”

In February, Bryant said he wasn’t sure whether the department’s lack of communication was due to “arrogance” or “ignorance.” This month, he struck a decidedly different tone.

“At this point I think they’re doing everything they can and should. I think they stepped up to the plate and gave two dates for a public hearing and a third date for a follow-up. I think it’s good faith on their part.”

“They’ve done everything that we asked,” Bryant added. “You’ve got to give them the benefit of the doubt.”

Corey, who said he was concerned about a lack of opportunity for citizen input, said he was also satisfied by the department’s response. In the intervening weeks, Corey knocked on eight doors in the neighborhood close to the proposed facility, seeking public feedback. The response has been muted so far, he said.

“I got varying bits of interest. I got everything from, ‘It’s their property and they’ll do what they want with it,’ to other people saying they’ll definitely attend the meeting,” he said.