Travis County jail expansion makes no sense, so of course they might do it anyway

For many years, combating unnecessary jail expansion around the state was a central focus of this blog. But over time, the jail building boom relented and this blog roamed in other directions. So I'm surprised to find myself drug back into the debate on my home turf, with politicians I've known for years leading the charge to build new jail space Travis County doesn't need. I'd hoped we were past this.

The issue is construction of a new women's jail, a proposal originating in the county's 2016 strategic plan. The county will vote tomorrow on whether to spend $4.3 million to plan construction for a proposed $80 million women's jail expansion, though high construction prices due to recent commodity price spikes make it likely the costs would be higher.

But a lot has happened since 2016, most notably that the jail population has plummeted, starting before COVID then accelerating over the last year. County Judge Andy Brown and Commissioner Ann Howard have proposed a resolution to reevaluate the 2016 plan in light of current needs.

At this point, the jail is less than half full. Among women, most of them remain in the jail less than three days. Of the current population, only about 40 women have been incarcerated longer than that.

Spending $80 million on facilities that will mostly benefit so few women makes no sense. Yes, it's true bond money can only be spent on facilities. But bond PAYMENTS come from the same tax revenues that fund every other part of the budget. The idea that this investment doesn't compete with resources for services simply doesn't hold water and apologists for the new jail should stop saying it. We all know where the money to make debt payments comes from!

Even more disingenuous are those who raise the "murder spike" to argue for expanded jail space. Most murder suspects aren't women, and most people in jail aren't murderers. Anyway, the new facilities wouldn't be ready for four years! Short-term crime trends aren't an argument for long-term capital investments, especially when there's so much vacant jail space to begin with.

All sorts of factors have contributed to Travis County's jail population reduction and make it likely it will be sustained. Judges who began using more expansive pretrial release protocols to save lives during COVID say they largely intend to continue them once COVID abates. The county has largely ceased prosecuting marijuana cases, and many other nonviolent misdemeanors and low-level felonies are being handled through front-end, pretrial diversion. A new public defender's office is just getting set up but will soon provide more defendants better representation, making pretrial release more likely.

At a minimum, the jail population reduction in the five years since the 2016 plan provided breathing room for the county to reevaluate. Back then, the jail already had more people in it than it does today and lumber prices weren't through the roof. There's simply no need to build more jail space now and from a cost perspective, it's a bad moment to do so. Let the overheated lumber markets die down and give the system time to see if the reductions will be sustained. There's no immediate pressure to do otherwise.

In many ways, this is a bizarre debate. Usually, when Grits argues against new jail spending, jails are full and I'm suggesting diversion programs and cohorts of arrestees who can be safely released as an alternative to jail expansion. But in this case, Travis County faces none of those pressures.

Commissioners Shea and Travillion want to build a jail because the Sheriff wants it, not because the county needs one. But there's a reason the Texas constitution separates jail management functions from budget writing: It's the commissioners' job to vet such proposals, and any rational analysis of county needs argues against jail building right now.

We live in such an odd political moment. Jails are so expensive and cumbersome for counties, usually commissioners only want to build them as a last resort. To have self-avowed liberals wanting to build one when they don't need the space feels like a bit of a through-the-looking-glass moment. But for long-time observers, perhaps it isn't as surprising as it seems.

Liberals pushing to build a jail we don't need feels to me like a throwback to the Ann Richards era. Then, liberals championed prison building as a last ditch effort to stop the state from flipping to Republican control. Trying to "out incarcerate" Republicans didn't work then and it won't help today. Instead, it will dissuade voters Democrats need from coming to the polls at all. 

Jail opponents have presented the County with a robust set of alternatives that address Travis County's real needs -- build mental health crisis centers and intermediate treatment options, housing, substance abuse services and more. People like those ideas. They poll well. They actually work. Why not stop trying to out-Republican the Republicans and stand for something different?

UPDATE: After a fairly dramatic hearing in which three commissioners for a time appeared to lean toward moving forward, more than 100 speakers against from all walks of community life convinced them to delay the jail project for a year in a unanimous vote. This got uglier and weirder than it needed to be. Unless it was contractor-driven, I still don't understand the urgency behind jail proponents' push while the jail is half full. Glad they delayed it.

Presumptive Travis DA Jose Garza on death penalty, women's jail, and membership in TX state prosecutors association

The Marshall Project's prolific Keri Blakinger generates more copy than her employers will publish, so she's been sending Grits an occasional email featuring unpublished odds and ends. Today, we have a few tidbits from a recent interview Keri conducted with Jose Garza, Travis County's presumptive Democratic District Attorney pending tomorrow's election (he has an opponent, but the Democratic primary is the real race in Austin).

Keri spoke to Garza about the death penalty, building a new women's jail, and whether he intended to retain membership in the Texas District and County Attorneys Association. Enjoy!

Hey Grits,

A couple weeks ago I had a chance to Zoom chat with Travis County DA candidate Jose Garza. A lot of our talk was on background - but I just wanted to pass along some of the points that were not, and that might interest you and your readers. These are kind of off-beat questions because I was trying to ask about details I hadn’t seen discussed elsewhere - and the many prior interviews he’s done have covered a lot of the basics, plus his website is pretty detailed.

So at this point we already know that he’s pledged not to use civil asset forfeiture without a conviction, that he will stop prosecuting less than a gram drug cases, will put more resources toward serious crimes like sex assault, and various other things you have outlined previously.

Given how progressive his platform is, I was interested in whether he’d pull Travis County out of TDCAA. A few months ago on Twitter, he was pretty clear that he would: “TDCAA has been one of the largest impediments to progress at the TX state legislature,” he tweeted. “I’m running for DA to build a system that lifts up working people and people of color. When elected I will not be joining the association.”

And some elected prosecutors elsewhere - like Philadelphia and California - have cut ties with their respective DA associations because they were too regressive or “out of touch.” But as you pointed out to me, TDCAA provides training and other support that would have to be replaced so it’s not as simple as just walking out the door. When I asked TDCAA, they said that about 30 elected prosecutors in Texas are already not members. So it seems there is some precedent here for non-membership.

When I asked JG about all this a few weeks ago, initially he said that he would be evaluating existing relationships to figure out which are in line with the office’s goals before making any decisions. But when I circled back to ask if that was different than what he’d tweeted in January he clarified that he still hopes to exit TDCAA and basically is just figuring out what that looks like at this point: “It remains a goal to me,” he said. “It remains a goal to make that there is a better structure for truly representing the views of district attorneys and the people they are accountable to.”

I realize this is a lot of words I just spent on what is really a very niche thing to be interested in, but I hopefully Grits and Grits readers might share my niche interest.

In other, slightly-less-niche interests, I also asked him some about capital punishment. He’s talked before about opposing the death penalty, but I wanted to know if that meant that he would actually stop defending the existing death sentences that are in post-conviction litigation now - which is about half a dozen cases. When we spoke, he pledged to review those cases, but didn’t say whether he would defend death sentences if the convictions themselves seemed solid.

“We will be reviewing all of those cases to aggressively seek out innocence but not just innocence, constitutional defects in cases,” he said. “I presume that post conviction that there are probably challenges, there are probably actual innocence claims… as a matter of course no we are not just going to presume that all of these cases should continue to be defended.”

It’s not quite a clear answer to what I was getting at, but I’ll be interested to see how this develops.

The other thing we talked about the most on the record was the new women’s jail, which he’s previously said he opposes. As Grits readers probably know, Travis County has been working on building a new women’s jail for some time now. The proposal to replace it would create more beds, but the current one is shitty and doesn’t have good program space. As someone who has actually spent time in a jail, I always want to know exactly why when people oppose doing something that would improve shitty living conditions.

“I’m in favor of less shitty,” he said, “but for me this is about math and this is about resources. I think what the county is attempting to accomplish and what the sheriff is attempting to accomplish is admirable and is the right thing because there will continue to be people in our jail and we have a responsibility to make sure everyone there receives the best care.”

But not if it requires a bigger jail - which he believes will be even more unnecessary when he’s in office:

“There are a couple of hundred people in the jail right now and it’s about 500 short of capacity – it’s at something like 30 percent capacity, for women in particular,” he said. “And on top of that Travis County is going to have a new DA and new county attorney that have pledged significant steps that would reduce the jail’s population. I’m not convinced that when the trendline is decreasing jail populations… that the best way to care for the shrinking population of people in the jail is to build a brand new $98 million facility.”

Anyhoo, that’s a lot of words and I’ve droned on quite a bit about some obscure topics here so enjoy.

Grits here: Just to say so, since Keri didn't, Garza's answer on pulling out of the DA's Association was insensible, answering a yes-or-no question about a pretty-clear campaign promise with pure squish.

To be clear, I like Jose, while TDCAA has for two decades resided on Grits' frenemies list. It would tickle me to no end if DAs from the big counties started to walk away from the state prosecutors' association. At the same time, I marveled when Garza made that pledge in the first place. My immediate first thought was, "He hasn't considered everything that would entail." So Grits wouldn't blame him for not knee-jerk pulling out of TDCAA in January without a plan. After all, that's the organization that provides most of their training.

Plus, Garza will be arriving just as the legislative session gets underway: The biggest complaint about TDCAA from reformers is them thwarting reform bills behind the scenes. Once session begins, Garza can assess for himself whether it's possible to influence the organizational culture from within.

TDCAA has historically been a problem for the Texas #cjreform movement, and Garza along with other elected big-county prosecutors perhaps can help solve it, whether by working from within or leaving and doing their own thing. Their rural counterparts may outnumber them when it's time to vote for board members, but big counties' dues provide most of their funding.

RELATED: From the Texas Observer, "Jose Garza redefines 'progressive prosecutor'"

Texas prison pop reaches 21st-century lows, but jail populations rising again

Keri Blakinger brings word that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice a) has shuttered three additional prison units and b) has witnessed the prison population dip to 120,709, which is the lowest it's been since before the turn of the century. That's mainly because county jails for several months stopped sending new inmates to TDCJ, says Blakinger, but they started taking them again in June. I'm a bit surprised that they wouldn't have caught up four months hence.

Perhaps also contributing: a substantial, reported crime decline this spring and court slowdowns, including most not setting felony trials, thus possibly delaying plea bargains.

By contrast, Texas county jails statewide had reduced populations by about 15% this spring, but as of October 1st are back to pre-COVID levels.

Both juvenile commitments to youth prisons and certifications of youth as adults also declined in 2020, reported the Legislative Budget board.

Rainy Day Reading

Poking around this afternoon on some state agency websites, I ran across several disparate items I wanted to record for my own purposes which may also interest Grits readers:

State Prosecuting Attorney: Check out an interesting Power Point detailing different legal provisions establishing prosecutors' duty to disclose evidence to the defense in Texas, as well as limitations on defense attorneys' ability to advise clients on how to handle potentially incriminating evidence.

Texas Indigent Defense Commission: See a variety of linked training resources related to magistration, managed-assigned counsel programs, and competency restoration from a conference in January. This presentation on the challenges of implementing the Fair Defense Act included a chart demonstrating smaller Texas counties are still resisting requirements to appoint counsel for indigent defendants in misdemeanor cases.

Texas Forensic Science Commission: The commission has published a complete list of licensed technicians and forensic analysts in Texas. Here's more background on the licensing program, which took effect last year. 

Texas Commission on Jail Standards: Here's their guidance to jails on implementing Governor Abbott's new executive order forbidding county jail visitation except for attorneys and clergy.

Texas Commission on Law Enforcement: See their guidance to agencies on law-enforcement training delayed by coronavirus restrictions. There are currently more than 80,000 licensed peace officers in Texas, or about 2.7 cops for every 1,000 people.

TDCJ population hits recent lows thanks to COVID, but the reduction is a phantom that at some point will reverse

Thanks to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice's cessation of intake from Texas county jails, the state's prison population has declined to what may be a 21st century low of 135,833. (See this report documenting monthly totals.)

Last year, TDCJ averaged 5,475 new receives per month, so the reduction is attributable almost entirely to the lack of new intake. Nobody extra is getting released.

In fact, the same report tells us fewer people may be released now than before. Some 1,806 fewer people were granted considered for parole in April compared to March, and 654 fewer approved. Many of these folks still must receive treatment services or have discharge plans approved. So that reduction wouldn't affect that many immediate releases last month. But it could set the stage for fewer releases down the line.

Grits wonders if this isn't an issue of practicality rather than policy. I've been assured by legislators that the parole board hasn't altered release policies as a function of the coronavirus. But there are only 8 parole board members and 16 commissioners who make these decisions. It's not hard to imagine that, with schools out, people's kids at home requiring supervision and schooling, difficulties conducting face-to-face parole interviews because of lockdowns, and all the other life disruptions that have come along with the COVID shutdown, workloads could have fallen not because of policy but just because those individuals couldn't process as many cases last month. That's speculation, but it would explain the contradiction between the data and official statements that release policies haven't changed.

Regardless, when TDCJ begins taking inmates from county jails again, we're no doubt going to see a big jump in their population numbers. And at some point, the dip in parole releases, combined with the delayed intake, may push TDCJ's population even above pre-COVID levels.

The report didn't give us recent enough data to say what's happening with probation revocations (much less tell us how that relates to the COVID shutdown). Parole revocations are down about 15 percent over the first four months of 2020 compared with the same period in 2019.

It's also notable that county jail populations overall have declined during the COVID lockdown, even though thousands of TDCJ-bound prisoners are stranded there who normally would have already moved on to state lockups. That means declines in crime/arrests/jail intake, combined with judicial efforts to eliminate low-risk offenders from jails, have had an even larger effect on local jail populations than the backing up of TDCJ-bound inmates.

That's good news. Grits is hopeful that local justice systems will emerge from the COVID era adopting what's been referred to by some as a "new normal," maintaining some of the policies and practices that drove jail populations down into the future, even when the virus isn't influencing decisions.  It's not like we've seen some major crime spike during this period of reduced arrests, expanded pretrial release, and lower jail populations.

Finally, Grits is surprised we haven't heard more, louder complaints from county sheriffs and commissioners over the thousands of inmates backed up in county jails awaiting transfer to TDCJ. These folks cost counties about $60 per day per person and there is no money available to cover those costs. Sheriffs raise bloody hell over the cost of parolees incarcerated over "blue warrants," and that's a much smaller number of folks.

The Governor announced local criminal-justice grants for jails to pay for medical services related to COVID, but they don't cover costs for inmates who normally would have moved on to state prisons. Look for this issue to have a higher profile as the number of state prisoners backed up in county jails continues to mount.

CORRECTION: This post originally said there were 1,800 fewer people paroled in April than March. That number represented those considered for parole. There were 654 fewer people approved. I regret the error. Thanks to Marc Levin for pointing it out: That's excellent and commendable reader behavior. :)

Small town TX editor wins Pulitzer for jail-death series

Congratulations to Jefferey Gerritt of the Palestine Herald Press, who won a Pulitzer Prize this week for his excellent series on problematic Texas jail deaths. Go here to read them all. Nicely done!

MORE: Texas Monthly has more background on Mr. Gerritt and his award.

Number of Texas jail inmates with COVID rose 187% in 8 days

Governor Abbott may want to open the economy back up, but in county jails, the problem is only getting worse. The number of Texas county jail inmates diagnosed with COVID-19 increased by 187% in just over one week!

As of April 19th, 180 Texas county jail inmates had tested positive for the coronavirus, as well as 153 jailers, Grits had reported based on documentation from the Texas Commission on Jail Standards.

As of yesterday, April 27th, TCJS reported that a whopping 518 jail inmates have now been diagnosed with the coronavirus, along with 219 staff. An additional 33 inmates and 384 jail staff are in isolation awaiting test results. And more than 5,000 other inmates - about 9% of the statewide jail population - have been quarantined or put into isolation but are not being tested.

Nearly half the reported inmates with positive diagnoses, 243 of  them, were in Harris County. But other counties saw significant increases. The number of cases in Tarrant County, for example, jumped from seven to 47. Dallas went from 64 inmates testing positive to 155.

CORRECTION: The original headline mistakenly said the increase was 238% - I'd accidentally divided by the earlier number of diagnosed jailers instead of inmates. Spotted within 5 minutes after posting and corrected it ASAP, but I regret the error.

UPDATE: It won't take long, it seems, for my original, erroneous headline to become correct. In the April 28 report, TCJS says 569 inmates have now been diagnosed with the coronavirus (along with 228 staff). That comes to a 216% increase over 9 days. How is this not bigger news? See related coverage from the Dallas Observer.

NUTHER UPDATE: As of 10 days out, the increase is now 248%, with 626 inmates reported testing positive for coronavirus as of April 29. The number of jailers testing positive increased 57.5% over this 10-day period, from 153 to 241.

Roundup of Texas headlines on COVID in prisons and jails

Several, notable headlines drew Grits' attention related to the coronavirus and Texas prisons and jails. Let's round them up.

• Texas Tribune: Texas Supreme Court sides with Abbott after judge halted his order restricting jail release: The high court did not weigh in on the arguments that Abbott's order went beyond his executive powers in a disaster. Instead, it ruled the Harris County judges were the wrong plaintiffs. Here's the SCOT order.
• Texas Observer: Greg Abbott's power grab on bail reform
• Texas Tribune: Federal appeals court stops earlier order, says Texas doesn't have to give inmates hand sanitizer or face masks for now. See the 5th Circuit's court order.
• Houston Chronicle: ‘A perfect storm’: Health experts warn of rapid COVID-19 spread in Texas prisons, recommend early releases
• KHOU: TDCJ correctional officer, 2 inmates die from apparent COVID-related complications
• Huntsville Item: TDCJ COVID-19 UPDATE: Offender at Wynne Unit has died from coronavirus
• KLTV: TDCJ updates Beto Unit 106 COVID-19 cases, 54 tests pending
• Texas Tribune: Coronavirus in Texas: County jail population shrank by more than 10,000
• Dallas Morning News: Dallas detention officers told not to ‘spook’ inmates with masks as COVID-19 fears began, testimony shows
• KHOU: 151 Harris County Sheriff's Office employees, 99 jail inmates test positive for coronavirus
• KRGV: At least 9 jailed for violating Cameron County emergency order
• McAllen Monitor: LUPE talks jail reform; details of first inmate case emerge
• Montgomery Advertiser: Sheriff requests hazardous duty pay raise for county employees during pandemic
• KRIS-TV: Are remote hearings the future for legal system?

Snapshot of coronavirus in Texas county jails

Today, as Grits catches up on all that's happened while I've been under the weather, I decided to check in on the extent of coronavirus contagion reported so far in Texas county jails. Here's an update.

Statewide, according to data from the Texas Commission on Jail Standards, as of April 19, 180 Texas county jail inmates have tested positive for the coronavirus, as well as 153 jailers. Another 3,668 inmates were in isolation/quarantine, 160 inmates were awaiting test results, and 3 inmates with active COVID cases were being treated offsite. By contrast, test results were pending for all 144 jailers who were quarantined or isolated because of the virus, so testing clearly has been concentrated among staff, not inmates.

The most troubling situation arises in Harris County. In Houston, reported KTRH radio on April 20:

The number of Harris County Sheriff’s Office employees diagnosed with coronavirus has reached 126, with 108 of the positive test results being among those who work in the jail. 

There are currently 327 Harris County Sheriff’s Office deputies, detention officers and support staff on quarantine for possible COVID-19 exposure. Six of these employees are currently in the hospital. As of Monday, 153 previously quarantined employees – including 20 who previously tested positive for the virus -- have returned to duty. Seventy-nine Sheriff’s Office employees are still awaiting test results. Forty-three employees have received negative test results.

After Harris, Dallas County faces the biggest numbers. According to TCJS, 64 inmates have tested positive, along with 19 staff. An additional 39 inmates and 11 staff have been tested and are awaiting results, while 428 inmates were being kept in isolation but haven't been tested. A federal lawsuit filed in Dallas seeks to have medically vulnerable inmates released. The Sheriff says the county is already seeking to fast track release of medically vulnerable and has asked local law enforcement agencies to issue more citations instead of arresting people for low level offenses. But at some point, it's possible the federal courts could intervene.

In the San Antonio Express News we find a remarkable news story about COVID in the Bexar County Jail. There, "the number of inmates infected with the virus had grown to 20, including three being treated at a hospital. In addition, 21 deputies and five staffers who work at the jail have tested positive. Fourteen of the deputies were in the same cadet class, fresh from the training academy."

The Bexar Sheriff's Office announced new policies to address the virus:

In response to the outbreak, Sheriff Javier Salazar said he enacted a handful of changes at the jail, including the distribution of masks to all 3,000 inmates, twice-daily temperature checks and frequent cleanings of common areas, including the recreation room.

He said several units are locked down — confining nearly 1,000 inmates to their cells for 23 hours a day — and that the jail’s inmate worker program has been suspended after an inmate working in the kitchen was possibly exposed to the virus.

But reporter Emilie Eaton offered first-hand accounts painting a different picture:

In interviews with nearly a dozen inmates, their families and lawyers, they described a facility where 60 inmates are housed in a space with bunk beds barely 3 feet apart, not nearly the 6-foot separation needed for safe social distancing, cleanings are infrequent and not thorough, disinfectant is watered down, and temperature checks occur less than twice a day. 

The inmates said the staff provide minimal information about the outbreak in the jail, feeding false rumors about the virus. They talked about feeling scared and dealing with their fear by making morbid jokes about death. 

Lately, meals have been irregular and meager.

Cleaning in the Bexar Jail was also a fraught issue:

Five inmates said cleaning of the common areas was not happening twice daily, as the sheriff says. Inmates, who do the cleanings, said the yellow solution used could be described as “warm water” or “warm water with a tiny bit of disinfectant.” They said they’re not able to get more of it. 

Leilani Minjarez said her husband, who is in jail on a family violence charge, was tasked with cleaning the common areas a few weeks ago. 

“It’s not even a cleaning solution,” she said. “It’s 20 times diluted. He says he feels like he’s cleaning with dirty water.”

Further:

All the inmates said they weren’t given masks until a week ago — after the first inmate tested positive. By some estimates, it took even longer. They said the masks are flimsy and look like they’re meant to be disposed of daily. Some are falling apart. The guards have refused to give them new ones, they said. 

The inmates are each provided with one small, motel-size bar of soap a week, and when that is gone, they said, they either do without, find scraps that other inmates have left behind or have to buy more from the jail commissary. 

Inmates who don’t have money to spend on food in the commissary go hungry. One man told his lawyer that “everyone is starving.”

Sheriff Salazar disputed some of those contentions, saying cleaning is happening, masks are available, and they've asked their food vendor, Aramark, to begin preparing food offsite to avoid some of the problems described.

Otherwise, most counties have reported no confirmed COVID cases, but that may just be because the aren't testing. You can't report results you never receive, after all. Travis County has no inmates who've tested positive, but the press reported one jailer who did, though the case wasn't listed in the TCJS report.

Here are the other counties that have reported positive COVID cases to TCJS as of April 19:

Tarrant County has seen seven inmates and one jailer test positive, with one other inmate and 11 jailers awaiting test results.

Webb County has seen seven inmates and nine jailers test positive, with one inmate and one jailer awaiting test results. Another 111 untested inmates have been placed in isolation.

In Denton County, one inmate, three jailers tested positive, but testing for inmates appears very limited - none were awaiting results, as of 4/19, though three jailers have tested positive.

In Hidalgo County, one inmate and one jailer have tested positive, with no additional tests pending.

In Montgomery County, one inmate has tested positive and no others have been tested, although 8 jailers are currently in isolation awaiting test results.

In Gregg County, one inmate and three jailers have tested positive. Two jailers are in isolation awaiting test results, but no other inmates have been tested.

Historically, during contagions, jails have been incubators of disease. (See this excellent, extended Twitter thread documenting the problem dating to the 18th century.) In the largest Texas county jails, we're at risk of history repeating itself.

Once the virus is within the jail walls, there's really no way to prevent its spread. Even if inmates are kept in cells, most are double bunked and there's no way to avoid interaction with staff, who are just as vulnerable as are the inmates. In New York City, things got so bad that some 1,500 inmates were released to limit the impact. About 3% have recidivated and landed back in jail, which of course is the subset the local press focuses on, but at the end of the day, most did not, and incarcerating fewer people is the only sure way to limit the risk.

Texas' three largest counties may soon reach a tipping point when it comes to the coronavirus in their jails, especially Harris County, with employees coming down with the disease in such large numbers it calls into question their ability to house inmates at the volumes presently incarcerated there. More testing would be helpful, but it also risks exposing a problem bigger than the jails are prepared to handle. We haven't reached that point yet, but if and when they do, Sheriffs will need a Plan B besides playing the PR game and hoping for the best.

RELATED: District Attorneys in Dallas, Bexar, Nueces, and Fort Bend Counties, represented by my neighbor, Jessica Brand, filed an amicus brief in the lawsuit before the Texas Supreme Court related to the legality of the governor's executive order related to COVID-related jail releases. See here for more detail on their position.

Coronavirus and Texas jails

Despite his protestations to the contrary, to this observer, Governor Abbott's emergency executive order regarding jail releases seems fairly transparently aimed at thwarting bail-reform efforts in Harris County. Abbott says his order focuses only on the severity of the crime alleged. But since it does nothing to prevent people accused of violent crimes from paying bail and walking free, as a practical matter his order reinforces the tenets of the cash-bail system. Those who can pay may liberate themselves from the threat of catching COVID-19 in the county jail; poor folks will remain at risk.

If litigated, most smart folks I've heard from think the governor's order exceeded his authority, in addition to making little practical sense. Regardless, federal court orders trump it. The bail litigation over felony defendants being spearheaded by Civil Rights Corps will be the deciding factor. Judge Lee Rosenthal has already told Harris County many felony defendants must be released and is considering the fate of thousands more. Grits' prediction: In the near term, she will call the shots and the governor must be satisfied with attempting to blame the George-W-Bush-appointed judge's decisions on Democrats.

Otherwise, no other counties' jail-pop reduction efforts that I've read about addressed violent crimes, and most focused solely on misdemeanors. So other than thumbing his nose at a federal judge, to me the order served little purpose besides grabbing some tuff-on-crime media coverage during a period when the press has decided the coronavirus is the only story worth covering.

If history is any guide, jails are ticking time bombs for spread of the virus. Advice from the Jail Standards Commission seems well meaning but won't prevent the disease from spreading once it gets inside any individual unit. Jailers are at as great a risk as the jailed. It's not practical to enact social separation, so once the virus gets in, jails could quickly become petri dishes filled with disease.

In the near term, several counties have been successful at using personal bonds to slightly reduce jail populations. And a dramatic crime reduction thanks to social distancing should help lower jail intake. On the other hand, courtroom activity has all but ground to a halt, with trials postponed possibly for months. So there's a risk that those inside who cannot afford to buy their way out will be trapped there if (and when) the virus breaches the bastille walls.

Perhaps the most useful advice from the Jail Standards Commission was for law-enforcement agencies to arrest fewer people in the first place. There are seven categories of Class B and A misdemeanors for which police officers already have the authority to issue citations instead of arresting people. But most agencies, from DPS to the smallest 2-man police department - have never availed themselves of that authority. One excellent outcome from all this would be for all agencies to adopt such policies. Abbott's order, however, remained mum on the subject.

Indeed, most Texas law-enforcement agencies continue to give officers discretion to arrest for Class C misdemeanors. For the most part, these folks are incarcerated in city jails which are unregulated by the Jail Standards Commission. While no media coverage I've seen has focused on city-run lockups, Grits considers them just as or more likely than county jails to become infested with the virus. Nobody pays much attention to these backwater entities - even advocates - and as they are completely lacking in transparency, there's no real way to monitor what goes on there until the day tragedy strikes.

Travis County suspended all active warrants for low-level offenses, which seems like another effective step other jurisdictions should copy. That goes double for all Class C warrants. Indeed, arguably municipal courts and justices of the peace should simply suspend all activities related to Class C misdemeanors for the foreseeable future. In the current environment, the juice simply isn't worth the squeeze.

For additional recommendations, Michele Deitch of UT's LBJ School has created a list of best practices every jail should be following.

In some ways, these debates could end up changing the entire paradigm surrounding decarceration debates. Before this episode, while advocates may have fantasized about jailers releasing entire classes of prisoners, in practice, that only happened one case at a time. Now, more systemic approaches are suddenly on the table. If and when prisoners and jailers begin dying, public officials, including the governor, will find themselves under pressure to do more than issue politicized, unconstitutional directives.

Blakinger: Myriad pandemic updates, conflicting accounts on intra-prison transports, and one happy story to cheer you up

Our pal Keri Blakinger offered up another excellent and much-appreciated email update while Grits' blog content ramps back up. I couldn't be more grateful, thanks Keri!

Hey Grits,

Guess what I had for breakfast? Actual grits. For the first time in my life. I always skipped grits days in the prison mess hall but now I bought a bunch for my pandemic pantry. They are surprisingly good!

I was pleased to see your update and welcome your imminent return to the blogosphere! Here is one more get well and come back soon email and update.

As I’m sure you’ve noticed, the world is falling apart. So I’ve included eight depressing virus-related items, one longer discussion of an uncovered issue, and one short happy thing!! You have to make it to the end for the happy thing, no cheating!

Depressing Items

1. As coronavirus began making its way across the country a few weeks ago, people suddenly realized: Prisons literally banned a lot of basic disease prevention measures. With a lot of pressure some of this has changed, but generally, as of a few weeks ago prisons across the country banned alcohol-based hand sanitizer, made social distancing impossible, and did not allow face masks. (Relatedly, this is a good Stateman story from a few weeks ago about supplies/prisons.) 
2. There are a lot of aging and medically needy prisoners. This is a thing you have, of course, written about. And it came up a lot in the Pack litigation. But now it could be extremely problematic for the prisons and jails that are about to be overwhelmed with an illness that particularly puts medically compromised and aging populations at risk.
3. Given all that, prisoners are suing TDCJ. The attorneys on the case are - of course! - Scott Medlock and Jeff Edwards. Their names should be familiar to Grits readers because of the air conditioning and hepatitis C lawsuits. FWIW, there are a lot of corona-related lawsuits out there across the country, but most of the ones I’ve seen seem to be about release. This one is about conditions; i.e., they’re asking for supplies like hand sanitizer and measures like social distancing, not arguing that they should get out.
4. Speaking of release, everyone from experts to advocates to law enforcement officials to editorial boards has been advocating for jail and prison releases as a way to minimize the spread behind bars. The exact mechanics vary but the Galveston jail population is down 20 percent, Travis County is down some 600 people, and Dallas County - where 20 inmates have tested positive - is down a few hundred.
5. In addition to f***ing up the jails, prisons, courts and every aspect of life in general, the coronavirus is f***ing up death. Specifically, the pandemic has forced Texas to postpone three execution dates and seems likely to force the state to call off more. It’s also slowing down litigation, investigations and clemency efforts, as well as delaying trials, hearings and argument. Maurice Chammah and I quote your beloved podcast co-host Amanda Marzullo in our coverage of it.
6. The state is actively fighting to keep people in jail. First, Ken Paxton - himself a felony arrestee out on personal bond - filed to intervene and prevent the possible release on personal bond of 4,000 Harris County inmates who he said would be able to “roam freely and commit more crimes during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.” Then, the governor stepped in and did an executive order banning use of personal bond for anyone with any current or prior violent charge. The misdemeanor judges here in Harris County DNGAF. The felony courts are a little more complicated, as Gabrielle Banks and frenemy Sinjin report.
7. Speaking of death, a lot of people are buying guns. Federal background checks for gun sales are way up over last month, Ted Oberg reported. This is exactly not at all surprising - though the fact that in Texas gun stores have stayed open and abortion clinics were closed seems to have raised some eyebrows.
8. We all know short-term fluctuations in crime aren’t necessarily indicative of anything, but FWIW crime is down. I guess it’s hard to burglarize when everybody is at home. But at the same time, police are worried about seeing an increase in child abuse and domestic violence in the coming weeks. (In Dallas, the CBS affiliate already reported that happening more than two weeks ago, and Houston Public Media wrote about it this week.) I’m sure that’s only one of many awful, terrible things to come. Sorry this is the world you’re coming back to Grits, things got fucked up while you were gone!

The Longer Discussion:

The Texas prison system was slow to give employees access to protective gear and to halt inmate transfers, both practices that officers and advocates worried would create health risks during a pandemic that has already made its way into the state prison system. (As of Sunday evening, 18 inmates and 25 TDCJ staff had tested positive and some 3,700 prisoners were on medical restriction.)

Typically, hundreds of prisoners across the state are moved around every day, and there are more than 200 transport officers whose jobs are dedicated to making that happen. Sometimes the moves are for medical reasons, but other times it’s for court appearances, in preparation for release, to go to a unit that offers a specific type of program. The moves - often in the wee hours of the night - are stressful for everyone involved, and typically involve being chained to another person and loaded onto the white prison buses zipping up and down I-45.

But in the era of social distancing, that poses a clear safety risk - both because of the forced proximity and because of the possibility of spreading disease across the system through asymptomatic carriers. TDCJ - like every other prison system in the country - has already cut off visitation and programming, as well as attorney visits and in-person parole board interviews. But the continued need for prisoner transports has been a source of some tension. 

Even after officials in late March said the agency had stopped all but medical transports, officers repeatedly said that wasn’t true. At one point, it broke out into a little spat on Facebook between the Texas Correctional Institute Facebook page, a group run by TDCJ officers involved in a nonprofit by the same name.

“Texas prisons are breeding grounds for spreading COVID-19 with non medical chain buses running daily and staff lacking proper PPE such as N95 mask,” Texas Correctional Institute (TCI) posted on March 26, linking to an article titled: “Could Prison System Contribute To Increased Spread of COVID-19?”

“You are wrong,” spokesman Jeremy Desel wrote in response. “There are only medically necessary transfers occurring along with intake from unaffected counties. There are also significant supplies of N-95.”

The TCI main page and numerous individual posters disputed that, as did several officers I interviewed. 

Later, when I called Desel about it for a story, he clarified: Almost all transports had ceased, but sometimes people have to be moved from one unit to another to make room for other medical-related transports. The officers I’ve talked to still say that’s understating what’s going on, and point out that the agency is still accepting new intakes from counties and out-of-state. For example, officials in Louisiana confirmed sending two people to Texas last weekend - and both are now in custody of TDCJ. 

So it appears that even as the governor was drafting an last weekend’s executive order for any travelers from Louisiana self-quarantine, Texas was taking in new inmates freshly transported from a part of the country with one of the highest coronavirus infection rates in the country. It’s unclear if they’re parole violators or if they were picked up by a local law enforcement entity before ending up in TDCJ.

In recent days, officers have confirmed that internal transfers are down significantly, but the allegation that too many happened for too long is not unique to Texas: Across the country, other prison systems - particularly the BOP - were seemingly reluctant to slow down internal moves, facing some criticism for it.

Another source of criticism for prison officials in Texas and elsewhere has been the reluctance to allow the use of masks - both by prisoners and staff.  In the federal system, some units have issued them to prisoners and in New York they’ve (as of last week) been allowed for corrections staff and some prisoners. In Nebraska, last week the agency mandated masks for employees (and the prison director posed in one to make the point). Here, officers and union leaders voiced concerns over the past week or so about the lack of access to masks, which many report they have were not permitted to wear at work. 

“We’re already 4,800 officers short, we can’t afford a mass exodus because they’re not provided PPE,” AFSCME Texas Corrections president Jeff Ormsby told me. “The CDC is recommending a mask anywhere you go now, but we should be letting the staff wear them in prison.”

Late Sunday, that changed. Now, all medically restricted prisoners and all agency staff will be issued cloth masks. And, prisoners at the garment factories are making more. 

On the one hand, this raises questions as to whether the agency could have acted sooner - but on the other hand, it’s hard to fathom what a really successful intervention might look like in a prison system. In the absolute best case scenario, meaningful social distancing is just not possible in most housing areas, and so many of the other mitigation efforts pose significant logistical challenges. So what’s next? The union is pushing for a systemwide lockdown. So far, I haven't heard any official support for that idea but with the pace of this news cycle - who knows.

The Good Thing

PAM COLLOFF HAS A HAPPY STORY. Everybody hearts Pam, and I especially heart her right now for providing a rare, rare moment of hope when everything seems to be on fire. I could go on but you’ve read enough words by now so here it is: Joe Bryan got out. ENJOY. Congrats to Pam, and welcome home to Joe.

TX county jails seek to avoid, fail to cooperate with investigations into medical deaths, says Jail Standards Commission's Sunset 'self evaluation'

Grits took time this morning to read through the Texas Commission on Jail Standards' self evaluation created as part of the "Sunset" process, through which the Texas Legislature evaluates agencies' functions every few years. For my own purposes, I took a few notes. Here are the highlights:

For starters, jail capacity in Texas has increased more than five-fold over the last 36 years, during which time the state's population didn't quite double: "From 1983 to date, the number of county jail beds has increased from 19,000 to 96,578." About 2/3 of those beds are full at any point in time.

Evading death investigations through creative, post-hoc dismissals
TCJS identified a recurring pattern where some counties claim someone who died in their custody had been released in order to avoid an outside investigation. The problem arises when:

the county claims they have released from custody because a judge has dismissed the charges. While the inmate technically may no longer be in custody, there is a very real possibility that the events that contributed to their death occurred while they were in custody and preceded their PR Bond or transfer to the hospital. By not reporting the death, the jail avoids the required criminal investigation. This could be viewed as circumventing the intent of the legislature and existing statutes.

The agency has requested an Attorney General's opinion to clarify the issue, but that "does not guarantee a solution."

'Several times per year' jails seek to conceal medical records from TCJS death investigators
Some local jails, particularly those who contract out medical care, have sought to prevent TCJS from accessing inmate medical records as part of death investigations. Because part of their role is determining whether jail staff followed physician's orders, this would keep them from providing meaningful oversight in such cases. From the report:

Several times per year, the agency will encounter opposition when requesting inmate medical records. This most often occurs when dealing with a facility that utilizes a contract medical provider. Other situations in which this has been an issue is when a facility is using a contract provider for mental health services. When this occurs, the provider most often cites HIPAA as the reason for their reluctance or refusal to provide access. In other cases, the provider will claim that the creation of these records are “proprietary” and not subject to disclosure. When either of these situations is encountered, it slows down the process of trying to determine if there were any violations of minimum standards in an extremely important area. Failure to provide adequate healthcare can have dire consequences, up to and including death. Unfortunately, we have determined on several occasions that jails have failed to follow physician’s orders, and being able to identify and correct this issue is extremely important. Current state law and the federal act regarding disclosure of medical records provides an exemption that we have been able to utilize in the past when this issue arises. However, there is still opposition as entities misinterpret (intentionally or due to lack of knowledge) this exemption and slow down the resolution of complaints and investigations. (emphasis added)

Dealing with rulebreakers more quickly
The agency tends to focus on administering technical assistance to jails that violate rules as opposed to using punishments to provide incentives. "Over the past decade, the agency has expanded the amount of technical assistance provided to jails to reduce potential areas of non‐compliance. This approach has been well received by county officials and has allowed staff to focus on larger issues while correcting minor ones at the time of inspection." (See here for examples of inspection reports.) But as a result of recent legislation, counties will be expected to regain compliance more quickly following rules violations:

When first created, the agency’s enabling statute allowed a county up to one year to regain compliance. This provision has recently come under criticism as being too long. One of the bills from the 86th Legislative session now requires facilities that are operated by a private vendor and fail an inspection to appear before our board at the next regularly scheduled meeting. These meetings take place on a quarterly basis, which significantly reduces the amount of time we would expect a facility to remain in non‐compliance.

How other states handle jail oversight
The report includes an excellent, three-page table (pp. 6-8 in the paginated document; pp. 8-10 of the pdf) describing how other states handle oversight of local jails. It's a very nice little compendium of the agencies, enabling statutes, and basic jail oversight functions across states.

Agency as 'referee'
State government regulates jail conditions, but local Sheriffs operate the jails and county commissioners courts provide their funding. This disconnect among responsibilities can inject the jail standards commission into local political fights:

County jails are rarely a priority for local government but represent one of the largest liabilities for them. This can create friction at the local level and prevent effective and constructive communication between the sheriff, who is responsible for the jail’s operation, and the Commissioner’s court, which is responsible for funding it. These are local issues created by local decisions, but they directly impact the effectiveness of the program. With a goal of having all jails operate in compliance, the agency is sometimes placed in the unenviable position of referee in our attempts to meet our goal.

Training new Sheriffs a particular problem
From the agency's perspective, every newly elected Sheriff amounts to a role of the dice. They all run on a "keep us safe" political platform that pretends they're out leading posses chasing bad guys and barely mentions the jail management function which, for most of them, is the most significant and time consuming part of their job. From the report:

Every four years, there is approximately 33% turnover of the sheriffs from the previous cycle who are taking office for the first time. Depending upon their background and previous experience, their understanding of jail operations and the role of the agency varies greatly. Early outreach and education occasionally alleviate some of the issues but not always and not with all the issues.

Shift to electronic reporting despite county opposition
The agency will finally stop receiving paper reports that have to be re-typed into spreadsheets and have counties begin providing statutorily required data electronically.

With the passage of HB3440 (86R) by Caprigilone, over the next two‐year cycle, the agency will be phasing in electronic reporting. This will consist of counties submitting to the agency each month a “locked” excel spreadsheet containing the statutorily mandated data. Prior attempts had been met with resistance from counties, but it is no longer feasible or even responsible to have one FTE assigned to nothing but data entry in 2019. By having the counties submit this data electronically, the FTE previously assigned will now perform quality control checks and simply import the data into the agency database. From there, the data can be used to run multiple reports that we are required to create. It is anticipated that the FTE previously assigned can now assist with other duties and functions of the agency as assigned.

Disconnected county computer networks prevent real-time data analysis
The agency is frustrated that legislators expect them to be more closely tracking data from local jails than they are technically able to at the moment, not just because of statutory reasons but because of technical issues related to linking disparate computer networks:

Efforts to educate members of the legislature about our ability to carry out certain tasks they would like accomplished are sometimes met with “dismissiveness.” Most of this is related to data collection and information submitted by the counties. At this time, there is no central database or portal into which counties can enter and submit information “real time.” The monthly population reports are simply a snap‐shot of the inmate population on the first of the month. The other reports required by statute are daily counts but deal with specific segments of the inmate population not the entire population. Part of the issue with this inability to tie the 240 county jails into a network is that each county has purchased or developed their own software with varying levels of compatibility and capability.

Low jailer pay degrades professionalism
The report directly linked a lack of professionalism among county jail guards to low pay.

With each county jail owned, funded, and operated by local government, they are the ones that decide how much to allocate for jail staff salaries. In an overwhelming majority of counties, the starting pay is a major drawback and jails have a difficult time recruiting and retaining qualified staff. This is an underlying factor in almost every instance of non‐compliance and makes it difficult for Jail Administrators to manage and operate a jail. This results in a wide range of professionalism amongst the jails that we regulate. This in turn requires agency staff to provide additional technical assistance to county jails to assist them in operating safe and secure facilities.

How 'jails have become mental hospitals, and jailers have become social workers'
The agency suggests additional training for local jailers on mental health, especially in rural counties, but they recognize the mental-health problem is bigger, more structural, and fundamentally budget-based than a training-only response can solve:

One area that we are exploring for possible expansion is mental health training. Interaction with an individual with mental illness is challenging even in the best of circumstances. Once a person with a mental illness enters the criminal justice system, that challenge is exacerbated by a factor that is simply hard to quantify. With insufficient mental health providers to service the general public, the need in jails is even greater. With an estimated 30% of the inmate population either diagnosed or exhibiting signs of mental illness, the demand far exceeds supply. By default, the result is that our county jails have become mental hospitals, and jailers have become social workers. Neither the facilities nor the staff that operate them are properly equipped to handle this continuing issue, and no long‐term solution is in sight.

"Difficult and unpopular would be the two most accurate words to describe any possible solution" to overuse of jails for mental health purposes, the report opined.

Administering "Prisoner Safety Fund" now a key agency function
In addition to its traditional functions, the agency now lists as one of its six key functions the administration of the "Prisoner Safety Fund," which state Rep. Garnet Coleman created under the Sandra Bland Act in 2017. That fund had its authority expanded earlier this year. Here's what it does:

Prisoner Safety Fund. The 85th Legislature created the Prisoner Safety Fund as part of SB1849(85R). The original purpose of the fund was to assist counties that operate a jail with a capacity of 96 beds or less with meeting the technology requirements set forth in the bill. There were two areas specifically targeted. The first was the ability to verify observation checks of the inmates by staff in high‐risk areas by an electronic means. This can be accomplished via camera or electronic sensor. The second was the provision to allow access to mental health services 24 hours a day via tele‐mental health services. The 86th Legislature amended the criteria in HB4468(86R) and increased the number of counties eligible to those that operate a facility with a capacity of 288 beds or less.

So the Legislature has created a fund specifically to prevent jail suicides and facilitate provision of mental health services. That could afford some interesting opportunities going forward, although each new funding battle will be a struggle. Certainly the problem hasn't been solved yet, as an AP report emphasized recently. See a detailed discussion of the (relatively modest) grant program beginning on page 71 of the pdf.) Most of the money in the fund has not been spent yet.

Records maintained by the Jail Commission
For those seeking records from the agency, here's a good description of what they have:

The Assistant Director authenticates the reports and data submitted. The following is authenticated to ensure accurate reporting of measures:

(1) Agency Calendar. Each entry is  required to have an associated memorandum prepared by the staff member involved in the activity. The staff member submits these memorandums to the Assistant Director, who reviews each entry on the calendar to ensure that a memorandum is available.  

(2) Inspector Activity Log. Each inspector is required to submit a monthly activity report. The Assistant Director compiles these reports into the Inspector Activity Log and verifies them for accuracy by reviewing a master log maintained by the Assistant Director. Any discrepancies are checked against the county’s inspection files, which are maintained in the agency file room. 

(3) Planning and Construction Log. The planner submits a log. Any activity that is designated as a key measure is reviewed by the Assistant Director to verify that the activity is denoted on the calendar or monthly activity report and that a memorandum is available. 

The Planning and Construction Log is maintained by the Planning and Construction Division and provided to the Assistant Director no later than the fifth day of the following month. The Planning and Construction Division notes the following:

1. Technical Assistance provided to counties on site. 
2. Occupancy Inspections conducted (pass or fail should be noted).
3. Special Inspections conducted. 
4. Training Attended/Conducted. 

Memorandums are submitted in order to document activities designated as key measures.

On pages 16-17 of the pdf is a list of all the datasets maintained by the agency. (Many of these are available on their website.)

Also, some researchers may find it useful to see the information commissioners are given at their meetings:

For each Commission meeting, a reference book is created that includes information on any issue that comes before them. In addition, this book contains current financial statements, copies of any audits or reviews that are periodically conducted by outside entities, and a listing of staff activities during the previous three months. There is also a section that contains the compliance status of all jails under our purview, number of complaints received against jails under our purview, population trends, and construction projects.

Forgotten history
Texas law has mandated safe and suitable jails since the 1920s, but the state didn't begin inspecting jails until 1969. That year, the federal court intervened in "almost 20" local Texas jails because of poor conditions. The Legislature changed the law to allow inspections. (Really, they removed a prohibition on inspections.) After that, "inspections were conducted of all 254 county jails, [and] all but six were found to be in violation of state law."

In 1974,  a survey revealed that 68 percent of jails did not provide 24-hour supervision; 121 left prisoners alone at night; 40 percent "slept prisoners on the floor."

The Legislature formally established the commission in 1975. By 1978, "The Commission became mired in controversy regarding funding, conflict of interest, and agency abolishment." However, 1979 witnessed, "Acceptance of Texas Minimum Jail Standards by Federal Courts and drastic reduction in federal court intervention. The Commission issued the first notices of non‐compliance [later that year], marking the beginning of enforcement efforts."

Inmates from outside Texas
A few county jails house contract prisoners from other states, in particular, "New Mexico, Arkansas and Idaho." New Mexico and Arkansas Grits can perhaps understand as a function of convenience,  proximity, and the logic of rural resources. The Idaho inmates, though, constitute their own mostly forgotten story; they're housed in a privately run facility down in Eagle Pass and the contract has caused lots of problems.

In addition, a few counties contract with private-prison companies to manage immigration-and-other-federal cases:

several federal agencies such as the Bureau of Prisons, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the United States Marshal’s Service, all contract for bed space that falls under the Commission’s regulatory authority and is subject to inspection. Included in this number are seven (7) privately operated facilities and the companies that operate them through inter‐governmental agreements between county and municipal governments.

Inmate and family complaint procedures
Starting at the bottom of page 47 of the pdf is a detailed discussions of procedures related to inmate an family complaints which may be useful to those who, you know, want to complain. However, one can't file a complaint with TCJS before first going through the local jail's grievance process. They're an oversight agency, not the first point of contact. (If you're going through this process, Grits would recommend contacting Diana Claitor at the Texas Jail Project, who has forgotten more about the subject of jail-grievance processes than Grits has ever known.)

AG punted authority to approve contract-inmate schemes to TCJS
Here's a weird tidbit about jail construction/finance I didn't know. Grits has covered numerous Texas county jails seeking to expand to house immigration detainees and other contract prisoners. But I was unaware that, in the early '90s, the Attorney General's Public Finance Division struggled with this question of

whether the financing of jails or detention facilities of substantial capacity intended to house inmates of governmental entities other than or in addition to those of the sponsoring entity meets the public purpose requirement for the issuance of bonds and other securities.

They decided to punt the issue to TCJS, requiring that the executive director provide a formal letter recommending construction. The commission grants these "if appropriate," but the report doesn't say how appropriateness is judged. It'd be an interesting project to gather all of these through open records to figure out how often speculative contract jails have been recommended and on what basis.