Snohomish County officials feared this was coming. Overcrowding at the county jail, a predictable consequence of tougher sentencing and a booming population, appears to be heading to court.
Last week, 29 jail inmates filed claims totaling $6.2 million, charging that overcrowding (cue the mournful violins) forced them to eat cold food, sleep on the floor and suffer from lack of good ventilation. Even if all that is true, it’s hard to muster sympathy for inmates, especially the ones who keep making repeat appearances.
But then Tuesday, jail guards jumped into the fray, signaling that they’ll soon file claims of their own. The guards say they’ve been forced to skip meal breaks because staffing levels haven’t kept up with the inmate population.
The problem of jail overcrowding is real, and it has real-life consequences that must be taken seriously. The risk of letting things slide, beyond the obvious financial impacts of claims, is that a judge could order the release of dangerous inmates back into the community.
For its part, county government is taking serious steps. In a classic pay-me-now-or-pay-me-later move, ground was broken last week on county campus improvements that will include an $86.5 million jail expansion. The new jail, to be located next to the existing one in downtown Everett, will be built without a tax increase and is scheduled to open early in 2005.
Further, County Executive Bob Drewel’s 2003 budget proposal calls for capping the jail population at 80 inmates over capacity (the jail was 202 over capacity late last week), a plan that would be accomplished by releasing some inmates charged with non-violent felonies before trial. A consultant is developing a screening process that will include input from law enforcement officers, judges and prosecutors.
To fund staffing and maintenance of the jail, county voters were asked last month to approve a tenth-of-a-penny increase in the sales tax, but 51.5 percent of voters said no. That measure had the support of law enforcement, prosecutors and the unanimous, bipartisan support of the county council. It most likely will be put before voters again early next year, and it’s clearer than ever that voters should approve it. If they don’t, operations costs probably will come out of other public-safety funding.
Everyone — county officials, law enforcement, prosecutors, judges and voters — need to work together to address this problem in a way that minimizes financial impacts while maximizing safety. Release of those charged with non-violent felonies pending trial is one good solution. Programs that seek to cut the number of repeat offenders by helping inmates turn their lives around are also a step in the right direction.
If we don’t take care of the problem soon, someone may step in and take care of it for us.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
