The overcrowding in California’s prisons has captured public attention but the counties’ jails also are in dire shape. At least 20 counties have court-ordered inmate-population limits, and dwindling dollars are curbing the ability of the counties to house some 76,000 inmates.
The Schwarzenegger administration, with the federal
courts breathing down its neck, wants to save money
as well as reduce prison overcrowding. One plan, already
under way, will cut the 167,000-inmate population by more than a fourth over the next
few years by diverting some incoming, non-violent offenders to other programs, expanding parole
and probation, freeing elderly inmates earlier and
boosting threshold for some felonies, such as more
than doubling the value of felony grand theft to $950.
But three dozen local lockups across the state are
operating under state or federal court orders to curb
overcrowding, according to February 2009 data compiled by the California State Sheriffs Association.
That means jails will be ill-equipped to handle a portion – perhaps half -- of the estimated 42,000 releases, including 12,000 drug offenders, or diversions that may be coming their
way.
If the Schwarzenegger administration can save $1 billion or more through releases and diversions, the
impact on local detention will be profound, experts
say.
“What’s going to happen is that as the state begins to reduce
the prison population, there will be more inmates on
unsupervised release or a very limited supervision
release. Offenders being what they are, when they get
out, there’s a certainty that 70 percent to 75 percent will re-offend. That creates fresh charges, which puts them
directly back into the county jails. They (sheriffs) may have to book and release them,” said Jim Denney, CSSA’s executive director.
“Of course, for any serious offender, a homicide or
a rape, they would definitely make room, but that means
somebody else is going to have to go out the door,” added Denney, a 36-year law enforcement veteran and the former sheriff
of Sutter County.
Overcrowded jails are not new. Since the 1980s, as lawmakers and governors, and voters -- approved stricter sentencing for crimes, the inmate
population swelled and prison construction expanded
to meet the demand. The number of state prisons has
tripled in 25 years. There is a need for some $6 billion worth of new jail construction, remodeling
and projects, according to the counties.
County lockups large and small face overcrowding problems.
In San Diego
County, eight facilities, including the central jail,
operate under a court-ordered cap, as does Fresno County’s main jail, two annexes and a satellite facility.
In Butte County, the jail is ordered to contain no
more than 90 percent of its rated capacity of 614. In El Dorado County, the Lake Tahoe jail and the
jail in Placerville are under court order. Kern County
has four facilities under court order, as does Placer
County, with two. Three Sacramento facilities, including
the county’s main jail, have a court-ordered limit.
Jail expansion never kept pace with prisons, invariably
because other local projects took priority in funding.
Jails are the first step of custody for offenders,
accused offenders, parole and probation violators,
parties to domestic disputes, and more. People awaiting
trial are held in jails if they can’t make bond. People who are convicted of crimes often
are held in jails until transferred to state custody.
The state’s 117 jails are operated by the sheriffs in most of California’s 58 counties; Santa Clara, Napa and Madera counties have local correctional
departments.
The funding push that animated prison construction
passed the local jails by, in part because of periodic
recessions, in part because public interest is limited.
The counties “have not been able to afford costly jail construction
projects. There has been no stable revenue stream to
pay debt service on the bonds needed to finance the
renovation of existing jails and construction of much
needed new jail beds…Proposition 1A was approved by the voters in November of 2004, which will stabilize local revenue and prohibit unfunded
state mandates, but it does not generate significant
new revenue. Consequently, the supply of local jail
beds has not expanded rapidly enough to accommodate
demand brought on by population and crime growth,” said a 2006 CSSA report.
The California State Association of Counties agreed.
“A prisoner release order would shift costs and responsibility
for housing and providing services to these state prisoners
from the state to the counties that will have to absorb
this population,” CSAC legal writers said earlier this year. “This shifting of costs and responsibility has the potential
to overwhelm already overburdened systems, jeopardize
quality of care and threaten public safety in the affected
communities.”
