State Stumped About How to Ease Prison Crowding?

Matthew Cate, Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, said Tuesday “We are out of time and we’re out of room.  We’ve got to get this done.”

But this plan has been strongly opposed by local sheriffs like Ed Prieto, who argue that counties lack the jail capacity and the resources to handle the new load.

The Governor’s realignment plan, moreover, hinges on the proposed budget being passed with extensions to the state tax hikes.  Thus far, the Governor has not garnered a single Republican to support the plan.

Mr. Cate indicated on Tuesday that the state would ask for an extension should the state fail to meet the November deadline.  However, he is not fond of that plan.

“It would be irresponsible to just say we’re going to do nothing, to go back to the same three judges … and cross our fingers,” said Mr. Cate as reported by the Bee.

Meanwhile, the Bee reports, “Numerous law enforcement groups have endorsed the realignment plan, but the situation is still unsettling for some who say they need answers soon about how the budget impasse will affect them.”

“I’ve been doing this for 43 years, and I’ve never been as disappointed in people as I am today,” Yolo County Sheriff Ed Prieto told the Bee. “I don’t know what these politicians are thinking in today’s world.”

“They’re holding everybody hostage for their own personal needs and their own agendas.”

“[Sheriff] Prieto said his jails typically are at 80 to 90 percent of capacity and that he still does not know how money will be parceled out to counties if the governor’s plan is funded,” the Bee reported.

“I’m sort of preparing for who I’m going to cut loose when we start getting state prisoners,” he said.

Meanwhile, it is perhaps surprising that no one has considered the alternative to the realignment plan, that the ACLU and groups like the Ella Baker Center have proposed.

Statewide polling continues to show voters are increasingly in favor of reduced sentences and penalties for drug possession.

A March 21-24 survey of 800 California general election voters was conducted statewide by Lake Research Partners. It was released on Monday and  shows that nearly three-quarters (72%) of California voters support reducing the penalty for possession of a small amount of illegal drugs for personal use from a felony to a misdemeanor, including a solid majority who support this reform strongly.

According to a release from the pollsters, “Underpinning public support is the widely-held perception that the state imprisons too many people and that current penalties are far too harsh.”

They continue, “Not only does support for reducing this offense from a felony to a misdemeanor cross the usual partisan, regional, and demographic divides, it also holds up strongly under attack. Moreover, this is now a voting issue for many Californians; by nearly a three-to-one margin, voters are more likely to vote for a state representative who supports this reform.”

“Support for reducing drug possession  penalties crosses all the partisan, regional, and demographic lines that normally divide California voters,” said Allen Hopper, police practices director with the ACLU of Northern California. “Solid majorities of Republicans, Democrats and Independents from every corner of the state overwhelmingly agree that it’s time for a new approach. We need to stop wasting precious tax dollars on unnecessary, expensive jail and prison sentences.”

“Sacramento’s plan to keep people convicted of personal drug possession at the county level doesn’t address the belief of a majority of Californians that drug possession shouldn’t be a felony and that people shouldn’t be locked up for longer than three months for this offense,” said Margaret Dooley-Sammuli, deputy state director in Southern California for the Drug Policy Alliance.

Such policies would allow California to eventually get down to the federally mandated numbers, but no one seems to be advocating that approach.

In early May, the ACLU of California sent an open letter to Governor Jerry Brown, Senate President Darrell Steinberg  and Assembly Speaker John Perez, asking that two key reforms targeting waste in prison spending are included in the May revised budget.

They claim that these two reforms alone would save the state hundreds of millions annually: making possession of a small amount of drugs for personal use a misdemeanor instead of a felony and making low-level non-violent property offenses – like vandalism or writing a bad check – a misdemeanor instead of a felony.

“California spends hundreds of millions of dollars every year locking people up for low-level, non-violent offenses, said Abdi Soltani, Executive Director of the ACLU of Northern California. “Meanwhile, we are slashing funds for public universities and social services. So we had to ask, who is really high here? To balance the budget, we need to balance our priorities. We can save money and keep our communities safe by reserving felony sentences for serious crimes.”

Activists like Sumayyah Waheed of the Ella Baker Center were quick to applaud the Supreme Court’s decision, but were skepitcal of the Governor’s push for realignment, which would reduce the state prison population only by transferring the problem to county jails.

“It doesn’t address California’s addiction to incarceration,” she stated. “We can start to address it by reducing the penalty for simple drug possession.  Most Californians support this policy. It would save money and lives.”

“California doesn’t need to wait for the Supreme Court to declare that overcrowded prisons cause ‘needless suffering and death.’ But the justices have spoken, and it’s past time to act.  California must enact sentencing reform, now,” Ms. Waheed concluded.

Unfortunately, those in power simply have refused to consider this alternative.  Mr. Cate can try to bide his time, but there is a rather obvious solution he is refusing to consider.

—David M. Greenwald reporting