Board of Supervisors Approve Grant Application for Jail Expansion With a Twist

Arguing that this is not simply a return to business as usual by replicating the failure of CDCR at the county level, the County Board of Supervisors approved the application for the full 148-jail bed expansion, with the understanding that this money would go toward upgrading existing facilities and with the further understanding that Leinberger would be repurposed and, in fact, decommissioned.

The Board was assured that the operational costs of maintaining the smaller Leinberger was equal to the costs of operating the additional 148 beds called for in recommended Option 4.

Newly-installed Board President Jim Provenza wanted to make it “clear we’re not just continuing the same model of corrections but we are repurposing Leinberger for other purposes.”

Among the critical points of concerns has the been the notion that if we build it, the state will find a way to dictate to the county that they must fill those beds.  Sheriff Ed Prieto, however, argued that this was not likely.

Sheriff Prieto told the Board of Supervisors, “The sheriffs in each county are sort of in a unique position where they cannot be dictated [to as to] how they will run their operation.”

“I don’t think it’s a real concern,” the sheriff added.  He said he thinks everyone in the county, from the sheriff to the public defender to the district attorney to probation, are focused on the same point as far as AB 109 is concerned.  “I’m a strong supporter of 109 and also reducing recidivism.  I think the important aspect is that these programs are going to have to work and they are going to have to reduce recidivism not to increase the jail population.”

“The number one issue of this is beds,” he said.  “If we need the beds it’s nice to have them,” but he said that is not going to direct how he carries out his policies.

Supervisor Don Saylor was the lone dissenter from this plan.  He argued that the current needs assessment ended its projection in 2007.  The 2007 needs assessment projected continued growth in the jail population.  But what we have learned with actual data since then is that the Average Daily Population (ADP) has not increased since 2008 but dropped from 428 to 384.

He further argued that first-time bookings have fallen 25 percent, from 3200 per year to 2400 during that period.

“If we’re not facing the need to submit an application tomorrow, January 11, for construction or not, we wouldn’t be doing this proposal without updating that needs assessment,” Supervisor Saylor said, “because really from 2008 to 2011 we’ve seen reductions in the ADP and we’ve seen reductions in bookings, in particular first bookings have declined by 25%.”

However, the sheriff cautioned not to look too far into those results, arguing that they laid off 12 deputies who account for between 10 and 15 arrests per year.

“The question has been asked before and it’s been answered,” Sheriff Prieto said, “We’ve talked about the reduction of people getting arrested… we’ve reduced our staff by twelve deputies – every one of those deputies makes 10, 15, 20 felony arrests a year, so that’s about 150 to 200 arrests that are not being made each year.  That’s part of the reduction.”

Supervisor Saylor’s concerns in addition to the updating of the needs assessment is that we lack the data to really understand what the impact of AB 109 will be.

“Much of what we’re seeing right now with AB 109 is preliminary – we actually don’t know what the overall impact is going to be, what the needs of the inmate will be,” Supervisor Saylor said.  “We don’t know all that we need to know about the treatment needs, the accountability issues.”

“The addition of new beds, I don’t see as justified,” he continued, “because the needs assessment that we did in 2007… the facts that have been presented there as facts and projections have not materialized.”

“AB 109 is going to have countervailing or balancing population impacts,” he added.

Sheriff Prieto believes at the end of the day that this will help to reduce recidivism, which he considers the overriding concern.

The Sheriff added that he thinks, for the DA, public defender and probation, “All of us are really tuned in to reducing recidivism.”

He said his hope is not just to throw them all in jail.  “By the same token, my realistic view is that we kick loose about 3000 inmates a year…  So in reality if you have 145 more beds, you could fill them like that if we choose…  To say these jail beds are not going to be used in the future, to me does not make a good deal of logic by the mere fact that we’re overpopulated.”

Supervisor Mike McGowan said, “Part of our challenge here is the conflict between the philosophy of AB 109 and AB 900.  AB 900 says, we build a better jail, we pay for it at a good rate – and we should take advantage of that.”

“I think we here in Yolo County can do that in a way that leads to other concerns that I’ve heard Don [Saylor] express, which is not only a legitimate one, but perhaps fundamentally the most important question we have about law enforcement in Yolo County which is how are we going to start dealing with these issues [differently] than we have in the past,” Mr. McGowan added.

“I don’t quite buy the argument that somehow we’re going to either preclude our willingness or ability to aggressively approach the realignment concern by going with the larger grant,” he argued.

For Supervisor Duane Chamberlain, the issue was much simpler. “To me, the No.1 priority has to be public safety,” he said very plainly and left it at that.

Supervisor Matt Rexroad acknowledged struggling with this issue and argued that, while he agreed with all of Don Saylor’s concerns, in the end he sees the solution in a different place.

He argued that it was represented to him that the cost of operating Leinberger is the same as the cost of operating this additional pod.

“This was a messy process and one that I don’t like because we don’t have all of our questions answered,” he continued, “but I don’t think we’re ever going to in terms of being able to do this.  We’re dealing with a lack of data… It’s kind of shocking to me that the Department of Corrections doesn’t have better data to be able to make some of these decisions.”

“I believe that item four, quite honestly, is a better facility to deal with AB 109 than the facility we would have with number three,” he said.  For one thing, he believes it is far more likely that the county would get the money for this alternative.

He argued, as well, that he does not believe that we should not do the right thing because it is potentially growth-inducing. He believes we should trust ourselves to prevent that growth from occurring.

Don Saylor argued that originally he believed Option 2 was the best option, but that it became clear that we needed to do more.  However, he argues that the actual need for jail expansion was unclear to him, he was concerned with the overreliance on the number of beds, and came to the conclusion that Option 3 would be the better choice and opportunity to receive funds and beds.

“I’m not convinced that we need to build additional jail beds, certainly not at 148,” he told his colleagues.  “I understand the reasoning that we want to get this money, but I’m concerned with the policy that it lays out.”

He said that since the start of this process we have talked about utilizing good policies, “but I have to say, as yet we have not taken an action that acts on those concepts.  I know that we’re planning to, I know that the conversation continues and I look forward to that.”

But he said, “To this point we haven’t made a decision that acts on those reforms in a serious and concrete way.”

Board President Jim Provenza pointed out that, while the current crime might be non-violent and non-serious, there is no guarantee that these inmates’ backgrounds are not violent and we will be housing these individuals for a long period of time in county jail.

“The Monroe facility may not be adequate for those individuals to protect public safety,” he said.  He added, “My concern is to have a state of the art jail where we can do evidence-based practices in the jail.  We need to be able to deliver effective mental health services.”

Everyone seems to agree that the county cannot afford the new jail cells without removing the beds from Leinberger.  If that cannot happen, the operational costs would be too high.

Matt Rexroad argued that should be a separate question from the issue of getting the grant funding, and he expressed concern that tying them together could jeopardize the ability to get the grant funding for the jail expansion.  He was on the short end of a 4-1 on that question.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Categories: