Grayson County abandoned speculative jail building scheme

After a majority of the commissioners court spent 2008 and 2009 pushing to build an unneeded, 1,500 bed jail, Grayson County has wisely scaled back their jail building ambitions, approving a contract this week to add 96 beds to their current facility. Even that, IMO, could probably have been delayed. The Grayson jail's current capacity is 432, but as of December 1 (pdf) there were only 315 inmates there, including 30 being held on contract. But at least a 96-bed expansion is clearly designed to fill the county's needs rather than launching some grandiose, speculative venture to compete in the slumping private prison market..

The best part: The county can pay for the smaller jail with cash on hand instead of issuing long-term debt that would require raising taxes. There's a takeaway lesson from this episode that one would think should resonate with fiscal conservatives: Smaller government costs less; jails are government; therefore smaller jails cost less.

Indeed, one need only look at the jail fiascos in McLennan and Johnson Counties - where private companies convinced commissioners to build large facilities they didn't need that now sit empty with no contracts to pay the bond debt - to see the mess Grayson County would be in now if they'd actually built a speculative 1,500 bed jail. Grayson taxpayers should thank the police union CLEAT for suing to stop the jail vote last year; given this outcome, it saved them a lot of money and headaches.

See related Grits posts:

• Open records reveal Sheriff's disdain for private jail plans
• CLEAT will sue to delay Grayson jail vote
• Breakout! Burnet jail escape ill-timed for Grayson jail builders
• Jail standards commission altered needs assessment for Grayson County Jail
• TDCJ prisoner decline could bust privatization scheme for Grayson County Jail
• Grayson County Judge pushing irresponsible jail building scheme

More jail inspections unannounced, TCJS creating catalog of best practices

Texas Commission on Jail Standards chief Adan Munoz spoke to a group of Rotarians in Sherman and the writeup in the Herald-Democrat contained several interesting tidbits. For starters:

Tom Nuckols and Denis Cowhig asked Munoz if he could give any examples of any counties that had adopted policies to reverse increasingly high incarceration rates. They pointed out that the U.S. has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world and Texas' and Grayson County's exceed the national rate. Nuckols cited alternatives such as drug courts, electronic monitors for non-violent offenders, treatment.

Munoz said that such alternatives are becoming much more prevalent to cope with rising crime rates.

"What we are advocating, although we can't tell you how to do it, is if you want to reduce your jail population, find alternative ways to deal with inmates. Talk to your district judges; talk to your district attorneys; talk to your probation officers; talk to anybody and everybody that has control over alternatives, either sentencing or incarceration."

Munoz advocated holding judges accountable for speedy dockets. "The sooner you get that inmate out of jail the sooner you are going to reduce overcrowding." He said that also goes for alternatives to jail time as a sentence, for processes like electronic monitoring.

Munoz said the Texas Legislature also has recommended TCJS to help develop a catalog of best practices that are happening across the state. This means tracking inmates through the system, and attach a dollar figure to speed and delays in each phase of the justice system. Such best practices would be shared with counties to replicate.

Munoz encouraged all those present with a piece of the puzzle to work towards developing a definition locally of best practices and enhance the use of them.

Henderson said that sounded like such a great solution, a simple fix "and I know I'm asking the wrong person here, but why in the world aren't we doing that?"

When Munoz agreed he was asking the wrong person, Henderson said, "I venture the right people are in this room."

I was also interested to see Munoz describe a change in TCJS inspection practices:

Munoz said the standards TCJS enforces are set not to coddle prisoners but to protect county taxpayers. Each jail is inspected once a year. Munoz said until this last legislative session, about 85 percent of its inspections were announced a couple of weeks before they occurred. The Legislature recommended a change in that practice and now 85 percent are surprise inspections.

I'll bet with more unannounced inspections, the failure rate goes up.

Kathy Williams at the Herald Democrat is providing excellent local coverage of Grayson's jail debates; this was a good, informative article.

Open records reveal Grayson Sheriff's disdain for private jail plans

Kathy Williams at the Sherman Herald-Democrat is doing an excellent job covering the roller coaster ride over building a new Grayson County Jail after police unions scuttled a November election with threatened open meetings litigation. Williams has been especially adept using the open records act to dig deeper into the local controversy. A portion of her latest piece explains why the Sheriff opposes building a private jail operated by Southwestern Correctional/La Salle Corrections:

A few clues as to why the sheriff continues to question the wisdom of contracting with Southwestern to build and operate the jail came to light this week when he responded to a Herald Democrat request for records under the Texas Public Information Act.

In an interview Thursday, [Sheriff Keith] Gary said he will continue to meet with Southwestern, its construction contractor Hale Mills and its architect HOK until the Commissioners Court officially abandons that option. He added that he will not sign anything until he has an approved contract with all its attachments in hand and those documents address all of his safety and operational concerns.

Among the records the Herald Democrat received are notes that show that the sheriff, Chief Deputy Ron Brown and others have deep concerns about Southwestern Correctional's jail design. The company has operated in Louisiana under the name LaSalle Corrections and works mainly with prisons there.

In a letter to Pete Newsham, project architect with HOK, Gary wrote Aug. 24 that he and his staff were pleased with the cooperation of HOK, Hale Mills and Southwestern during a meeting on Aug. 11. However, "The outcome of the meeting on 8-19-09 has totally changed our feelings in regard to the progress made during our first meeting. The Sheriff's Office does not want a prison. ... I do not approve of a building, the design of which is primarily for prison operations and programs.

"The purpose of a County jail is, 'Care, Custody and Control of Inmates.' A large number of county inmates have not been to trial and found guilty. We understand that your mind set is totally different, and based on a convicted criminal concept. The fact that we are the customer has been lost in the discussion! Therefore we will find it difficult to approve the purchase of a product that we do not agree with."

Gary told HOK that he intends to continue working with them to address specific issues, and would ask Bynum to sit in on the next round of discussions.

In brief form, Gary outlined to Newsham the areas of disagreement, "the concept of what we believe to be the excessive inmate movement within the facility with or without supervision ... the concept of feeding inmates in a common dining hall ... the large outside prison yards ... inmate movement to the commissary ... the concept of contact visits.

"You have often stated to us that this facility will be under my control and will ultimately become our county jail. Therefore the facility must be planned, constructed and operated as a county jail. At this time, I cannot in good faith approve the plans."

Adding to Gary's apprehension, he said, is that Southwestern's newest enterprise, the Burnet County Jail, experienced a jail break a few weeks ago. The incident led to TCJS ruling Southwestern was non-compliant with jail operations requirements.

Excellent local coverage, particularly for a small-market paper. I don't recall reporters from the Tyler Morning Telegraph, for example, using open records so aggressively during Smith County's three recent failed jail-bond elections.

CLEAT will sue to delay Grayson Jail vote

The Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas (CLEAT) will sue to halt thevote in November on expanding the Grayson County Jail because the announcement for the commissioners court meeting where the date was set was posted one minute late, reports the Sherman Herald-Democrat. If they're successful in delaying the election, the county cannot set another vote until next May.

UPDATE: County Judge Drue Bynum says there will be no jail bond election in November because of the posting screwup. MORE: From KTEN-TV: "What's next for Grayson County Jail?" AND MORE: From the Sherman-Herald-Democrat. "Grayson County jail saga takes unexpected turn."

RELATED:

• Breakout! Burnet jail escape ill-timed for Grayson jail builders
• Jail standards commission altered needs assessment for Grayson County Jail
• TDCJ prisoner decline could bust privatization scheme for Grayson County Jail
• Grayson County Judge pushing irresponsible jail building scheme

Breakout! Burnet jail escape ill-timed for Grayson jail builders

In love and in politics, timing is often everything, and for jail builders in Grayson County, the timing of last week's jail break in Burnet County couldn't be worse.

The Burnet County Jail is the only one in Texas currently operated by Southwestern Correctional LLC, which is based in Louisiana and operates eight facilities there (mostly for the state prison system) under the name La Salle Corrections. (Hundreds of inmates from the Harris County Jail diaspora ended up in a La Salle facility in Urania, La). They also manage a federal facility for immigration and US Marshall's service prisoners in Crystal City, TX.

Grayson County Judge Drue Bynum and three other members of the commissioners court would like to hire Southwestern Correctional to run an oversized jail in Grayson County with an eye toward contracting out extra space to other jurisdictions. The Commission on Jail Standards boosted their estimate of Grayson's jail capacity needs after the private company and county officials lobbied them to change their methodology.

Now, the ill-timed escape and the apparent culpability of Southwestern Correctional employees may give voters a new reason to reject jail bonds scheduled to go to the voters in November. Here's an excerpt from a blandly titled piece on the topic in the Sherman Herald-Democrat:

Charles Ryan Boisseau, editor of the Burnet Bulletin and writer for the related Highland Lakes Newspapers, said he had spoken with Adan Munoz, executive director of the Texas Commission on Jail Standards, about the incident. Boisseau said Friday that Munoz confirmed that his office had officially deemed the [Burnet] jail non-compliant.

"The best way to describe it is a lack of diligence, a lack of professionalism," Munoz said.

Boisseau said the account he got of how the escape happened was that guards were rushing to process inmates back into the jail after a recreation break outside in a secure area. He said each inmate was supposed to be searched before and after going outside.

"One of the guards walked ahead of the inmates, and just basically let them close the door behind themselves," Boisseau said. That's when the man escaped by going back into the recreation yard, climbing onto a roof and sliding down a drain pipe.

Boisseau, in a copyrighted story Friday, said that Billy McConnell of Southwestern Correctional LLC confirmed that the jailer responsible for supervising the inmates coming in and out of the jail had resigned and two others face disciplinary action. Boisseau added in a telephone conversation that Burnet County Sheriff W.T. Smith's staff said he was worn out by the events since Sunday and could only be reached by e-mail.

Southwestern has 30 days to show Texas Commission on Jail Standards how it plans to correct the noncompliance issues. The inmate, Nuana Antonio Fuentes-Sanchez, was in jail awaiting trial on accusations he violently attacked a couple in their home during a robbery.

Boisseau said that privatization of building and operating the jail in Burnet County was a controversial issue. Burnet County Judge Donna Klaeger also serves as chairwoman of the Texas Commission on Jail Standards.

Reacting to these revelations, the blog Texas Prison Bidness asks, "Southwestern Correctional has major problems in Burnet; Are Grayson Commissioners watching?"

One wonders what might be discovered by searching further into La Salle Corrections in Louisiana? A quick Google search revealed an anecdote from 2003 about a La Salle-run facility where

For $3, inmates and visitors to the Claiborne Parish Detention Center in Homer [could] buy pirated copies of recordings by a wide array of performers, according to a lawsuit filed on behalf of the music industry. The jail's computers were used to illegally copy recordings by performers ranging from rapper Eminen to country music's George Strait to New Age instrumentalist John Tesh, Baton Rouge-based Utopia Entertainment Inc. charged in the copyright-infringement case ... in U.S. District Court in Shreveport.

That also sounds like a situation exhibiting a lack of "diligence" and "professionalism." One suspects this incident and the recent escape won't be the only lapses reporters or jail critics in Sherman might find if they dig into La Salle Corrections too hard.

According to TCJS chief Adan Munoz, in Burnet County Southwestern Correctional/La Salle convinced local officials to go with an outsized facility, just as they've been pushing in Grayson. "Our recommendation was 432" beds, he told me last week, but "They went with a private company’s own needs analysis and built 587, after initialing wanting 700 beds."

Some locals in Grayson County are already pushing back hard against plans that rely on TCJS' most recent, higher needs assessment, which relies on a methodology provided by Southwestern Correctional. That overreach by jail builders, combined with likely blowback from this recent escape episode, bode ill, one would think, for a jail vote that's now less than two months away.

I've seen no polling, but one suspects that if there's any organized local opposition at all it could easily vanquish the bonds at the ballot box, spoiling for now Judge Bynum's long-cherished dream of a jail so big it pays for itself.

Jail Standards Commission altered needs assessment for Grayson County Jail

According to Kathy Williams at the Sherman Herald Democrat ("How many beds needed at Grayson County Jail?," Aug. 30), the Texas Commission on Jail Standards increased its estimates for how many jail beds Grayson County would need in the near future after prodding by a private contractor.

Getting an accurate projection of the county's future needs has become a politicized issue because some members of the commissioners court would prefer to overbuild the facility and let a private contractor lease out the extra beds. At one point proponents wanted to build a 1,500 bed jail; the latest proposal was for 750.

But some locals doubt the projections for massive growth in the jail population, charging that a private contractor convinced state regulators to inflate the number of beds the county needs. The verity of those projections has become a pivotal factor, reported the Herald-Democrat, citing documents obtained under the public information act:

Asked how the commissioners court set the size for the jail they have discussed at 700-plus, Grayson County Judge Drue Bynum cites the Texas Commission on Jail Standards recommendation. There are two Texas Commission on Jail Standards reports. The two reports, published Nov. 24, 2008 and May 28, 2009, are identical except for page 5, "recommendations." Otherwise, they contain the same statement of "current jail conditions," "incarceration trends," "population predictions" and "additional considerations." The only changes in wording concern peak population factor and how it is calculated.

"Peak populations represent those days in each month when the jail has the highest number of inmates. The peak population factor represents an additional percentage of beds that are needed in a jail to accommodate those days when the jail population is higher than average," both reports state on page 4.

The November 2008 report states, "The average peak population during the last 12 months was 398 while the average daily population was 375; this represents a difference of 23. To calculate the peak population factor, 23 is divided by ADP of 375. This represents a factor of 6 percent which will be utilized in calculating the projected capacity needs in the next section."

This method of determining peak population factor led TCJS to recommend that a 528-bed jail would satisfy Grayson County's needs through 2028.

The May 2009 report states "The peak population during the last 12 months was 453 which occurred in August of 2008 ... While the average daily population (ADP) was 375, this represents a difference of 78. To calculate the peak population factor, 78 is divided by the ADP of 375. This represents a factor of 20 percent which will be utilized in calculating the capacity needs in the next section."

This method of using a one-day high, plus adding 10-percent because of Grayson County's proximity to the Metroplex, led Texas Commission on Jail Standards to recommend a 720 bed Grayson County jail as adequate until 2028.

Between these two reports, March 2, 2009, Grayson County Commissioners Court selected Southwestern Correctional LLC as the private company it wants to build and operate a new jail. The company does not yet have a contract with the county.

April 29, 2009, Tim Kirpiewski of Southwestern Correctional, sent a letter to the Texas Commission on Jail Standards, stating in part, "We request, on behalf of Grayson County that the Commission on Jail Standards revisit the conclusions reached in its latest Facility Needs Analysis Report last year and consider updating that report based on additional studies and actual statistics provided in this letter."

Sherman Mayor Bill Magers, who made the two Texas Commission on Jail Standards reports, the Southwestern letter to TCJS and other documents public Aug. 17, explained his objection to the second method of calculating recommended jail size.

"The slight wording change (between the two Texas Commission on Jail Standards reports) results in a significantly skewed methodology for calculating future jail capacity needs." Magers said. "It is tantamount to family of six constructing and paying M & O (maintenance and operation) on an eight-bedroom house because the in-laws come once a year and spend Christmas night in their home. The 2009 report treats a one-night event as an every day occurrence."

Accompanying this reportage was an editorial posing many of the questions raised by this debate for the Grayson Commissioners Court. To those one could add several more probing questions over the alleged influence of a private contractor on TCJS' jail population needs estimates.

I called TCJS Executive Director Adan Muñoz and his Assistant Director Brandon Wood to ask about these allegations. They emphasized that it wasn't just the private contractor but also the Sheriff's Office, the County Judge and other local officials who had encouraged them to revisit their estimates. But I was disappointed to learn that they had indeed altered their methodology in response to those arguments - IMO such estimates shouldn't be politicized by changing them in reaction to proponents or opponents in local jail building squabbles.

Muñoz said that when credible evidence was presented arguing for a different methodology, it was his agency's responsibility to consider it. In this case, data was provided purporting to show that the jail had already exceeded on at least one day the capacity TCJS estimates said wouldn't be needed until 2015.

However, those peak inmate numbers, said Assistant Director Wood, turned out to be ephemeral information to collect. The Sheriff's Office told state regulators that the average daily population of the Grayson Jail for September '08 was 475. By contrast, in its letter in April, Southwestern Correctional told TCJS the peak number of inmates in September '08 was 467, which of course is impossible if, as the Sheriff said, the average was higher. (!)

Wood said after independently recalculating the numbers from daily population reports, TCJS finally settled on 478 beds as the "peak" for September '08, but that figure included inmates housed from other counties as well as 96 beds leased to the US Marshall's Service. In any event, both he and Muñoz emphasized that estimates of future need are merely "scenarios" based on different sets of assumptions. And Muñoz emphasized he'd successfully resisted pressure from local Grayson County interests to justify estimates as high as 1,100, which he said weren't warranted using even the most liberal assumptions.

Muñoz said TCJS also changed its estimates in Austin County using the new Grayson methodology, in part because of their similar settings on the outskirts of a larger metropolitan area.

However it seems like such calculations - which are inevitably used in highly politicized ways in local jail debates - should be more standardized and less subject to lobbying efforts by local jail building interests. Maybe TCJS changed their methodology for legitimate reasons, but the timing - coming in response to Southwestern Correctional's letter - leaves an impression that the company was able to influence state agency projections. I can understand why the reporter in Grayson County looked askance at the revised, higher estimates. There's something about the whole chain of events that doesn't quite pass the smell test.

MORE: From Texas Prison Bidness.

TDCJ prisoner decline could bust privatization scheme for Grayson County Jail

In Grayson County last year, officials were enamored of the idea that they could expand their local jail without taxpayers "footing the bill" if they built it out much larger than necessary, allowed a private company to operate it, and leased out empty space to the Department of Criminal Justice. But with the jail building decision drawing near, TDCJ's population is down and they're not leasing as many beds from counties as they have in the past. Reported KTEN-TV ("Less inmates in Texas, more trouble for Grayson County jail," June 29):

Over the past few months commissioners have discussed privatizing the jail to reduce costs.

They hope building a larger facility will allow them to house more inmates from across the state and that the fee per inmate will be less than what their paying now. On the other hand, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice says the number of inmates in has fallen, which would lead some to believe a new, larger jail in Grayson County may be sitting empty, yet county Judge Drue Bynum says he not worried.

"Their feasibly study came back and said in the next 20 years we would need a facility that would hold between 720 and 750 people, so we were making our decision based on the jail commission feasibility study that we just engaged."

The new jail is slated to be built near the corner of Frisco Road and Graystone on the Northeast side of Sherman.

The company now being considered is Southwest Corrections. They hope to run a new 750 bed jail here.

I'd identified this issue when Grayson first proposed the idea of overbuilding and privatizing its jail, writing that "if the company can't find other entities willing to lease the beds at an inflated price, the county will be stuck with the full tab for space it doesn't need." Now on the eve of the county's vote on the project next month, that possibility appears less remote than when the economy was booming.

Judge Bynum now says it's no big deal if they can't lease the extra space, but as a practical matter, this new development sure seems to put a dent in the county's financing scheme. After all, he pitched the privatization idea saying it would mean taxpayers won't "foot the bill for the jail." They were operating under the assumption that profiteering off extra incarceration would pay for the county's baseline jail needs, but now, in the midst of a recession and with state inmate numbers falling, that strategy appears less viable.

Why not test DNA to corroborate capital innocence claim?

After more than 30 Texas exonerations based on DNA evidence in recent years, I can't understand how Grayson County prosecutors could even consider opposing DNA testing of old evidence before they put a defendant to death this summer who's claiming actual innocence.

Reacting to recent media reports, a witness has come forward who says death-row inmate Lester Bower's long-time innocence claims are true, and that her ex-boyfriend and three other men committed the quadruple murder of which he was convicted. This news arrives just weeks before Bower's scheduled execution on July 22. But inexplicably, the Grayson County DA opposes DNA testing that might corroborate this new testimony, preferring instead to push forward with the execution. Reports the Fort Worth Star Telegram ("Witness says condemned Arlington man not responsible for 1983 slayings," June 29):

Bower’s lawyers say they have identified the four men whom Pearl alleges to be the killers, have documented their long criminal records and have confirmed other key parts of her story. In recent months, a defense investigator has also located another witness, the wife of one of alleged accomplices who said she heard the four men discussing the killings. The names of the new suspects, though known to defense lawyers, have remained sealed by court order.

"I don’t want Mr. Bower to die for something that he didn’t do," said Pearl, who broke up with her boyfriend shortly after the slayings and remains fearful of him today. Since she signed the affidavit in 1989, her identity has been concealed by court order. "I know in my heart that he didn’t do it. I just could not in my conscience sit back and just go, 'Oh well, sorry.’

"If he would have gotten life in prison, I can’t sit here and honestly say I would have done something different. Life is what, 30 years in the state of Texas? But he got the death penalty, and there’s no getting out of that."

This past week, Bower’s lawyers filed a 65-page legal motion in Sherman’s 15th state District Court detailing the scenario developed after Pearl came forward. The petition asks state Judge Jim Fallon to delay Bower’s execution, vacate his conviction and death sentence, and conduct hearings on his innocence claim.

Because of the plodding appellate system in death penalty cases — Bower’s appeal languished in federal court alone for 16 years — and the shifting nature of capital punishment law, this is the first opportunity for a Texas court to seriously consider the merits of Bower’s innocence claim, his lawyers say. When Pearl first came forward, Texas law precluded state judges from considering evidence gathered more than 30 days after a conviction. The so-called 30-day rule is no longer in effect in Texas because federal judges have ruled that such post-conviction claims need to be adjudicated by the state.

"Whatever you think about the benefits of having capital punishment, no one could possibly argue that executing an innocent man is in the interests of the state, or our society," said Anthony Roth, one of Bower’s lawyers. "Our interests as lawyers and as people should be that our government, when in doubt, should not go forward with an execution. There is ample evidence to give people reasonable doubt about whether Les committed these murders. In my view, the evidence is compelling that he didn’t."

A Grayson County prosecutor, Karla Hackett, said Wednesday that the state will vigorously contest Bower’s innocence claim. Prosecutors also oppose a defense motion to have saliva, hair fibers and cigarette butts from the crime scene tested for DNA. Bower’s lawyers hope that the analysis will link one of the men accused by Pearl to the crime.

"There’s no way there is actual innocence here," Hackett said, citing the large amount of circumstantial evidence against Bower. "DNA is not going to make all that go away. It’s another delaying tactic. It’s normal. We expect it. There’s four dead men, and all the evidence points straight to Lester Leroy Bower Jr."

The science to match biological evidence through DNA simply didn't exist when a Grayson County jury convicted Bower in 1983. What could be the harm of testing the evidence?

Even if Bower was involved, why ignore evidence that might identify an accomplice? If the conviction was right, the state has nothing to fear from DNA testing. If they're wrong, why wouldn't they want to catch the mistake before the fellow's pending date with the lethal injection chamber?

Federal bill backing mental health courts a teaspoon of remedy for an oceanic problem

Good news and bad news coming from the federal level regarding mental health and crime, reports Kristin Houle over at Prevention and Punishment. The good news is that the President and a bipartisan coalition support legislation currently moving in the US Senate to expand resources and focus on "mentally ill offender treatment and crime reduction":

On March 6, 2008, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee passed S. 2304, the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Reauthorization and Improvement Act (MIOTCRA). The legislation, introduced last year by Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Pete Domenici (R-NM), Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA), will now be sent to the Senate floor for consideration.

The bill, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives in January with overwhelming bipartisan support, will help provide states and counties with the resources needed to design and implement collaborative efforts between the criminal justice and mental health systems. The legislation offers grants to communities to develop diversion programs, mental health treatments in jails and prisons, and transition and aftercare services to facilitate reentry into the community. The bill also provides for the cross-training of criminal justice, law enforcement and mental health personnel.

With bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate, the legislation will raise the authorization level of MIOTCRA from $50 million per year to $75 million per year and will extend the authorization through 2014. The bill will also reauthorize the Mental Health Courts grant program (Public Law 106-515) and will require that a study be conducted on the prevalence of mental illness in prisons and jails."

More information is available from the Consensus Project.

Earlier posts on the MIOTCRA are available here and here.

The bad news is that expanding federal resources by $25 million will do little to help given the scope of the national problem, and I don't know that we really need more studies of mental illness and crime so much as resources aimed at diverting offenders into treatment instead of warehousing. We know their "prevalence": Thirty percent of prison inmates in Texas are past clients of the state's indigent mental health system. We don't need to study the problem, we need Congress to fund more pilot solutions so we can study the results and find out what works.

I'm a fan of the idea of mental health courts, although I haven't seen data yet from those that have (recently) begun in Texas. (Harris County has operated a mental health court since 2006.) To me, adjudication of mentally ill offenders is an area where a less adversarial, problem-solving approach benefits the defendant, the taxpayers' bottom line, and also public safety. There's nothing either constitutionally prescribed nor inherently beneficial about the adversarial system, and while I don't want to toss it out entirely, as commenter Jigmeister accused me of recently, it makes sense when adjudicating the mentally ill to mitigate its rough edges in the same way that happens in family court, where adversarial interests are tempered by the requirement to consider "the best interests of the child." (I'll likely have more to say on this topic soon, as several recent items combined with Jigmeister's complaints have me thinking about it.)

In the meantime, adding $25 million for mental health courts and a study is a nice little bipartisan pat on the head from Congress, if it passes, but it's a teaspoon of remedy for an oceanic problem.

RELATED

• Grayson County applies to create mental health court
• Mental health courts: A strategy that works?
• Are there options to warehousing mentally ill offenders in jail?
• McKnight: 'Mental health consumers don't belong in jail'
• When I was sick, did you imprison me?
• Counties explore solutions for mentally ill in Texas jails
• New Austin PD office will defend mentally ill
• Travis County MH public defender opens

Wall Street thinks economic downturn will boost private prison fortunes

Sometimes it may seem like I'm picking on this or that county when they pursue jail overcrowding solutions that aren't in the taxpayers interests, but the truth is these issues aren't really local or even statewide, but are national in scope. After he left a note in the comments, I put in a call to Grayson County Judge Drue Bynum's office, though I haven't heard back yet. He's the fellow proposing the privatization plan that he says will let Grayson County build a new jail with no taxpayer investment

In the meantime, though, I noticed this item over at Think Outside the Cage pointing to a Reuters story that tells us Wall Street types are hoping more local officials like Judge Bynum decide it's cheaper to subsidize a private company to do the government's business than to do it themselves. Reports Reuters:

Government belt-tightening could be a boon for a range of mid- and small-cap names whose share prices have in many cases fallen as far as more cyclical companies that really do suffer in a downturn. And, analysts say, that could present some stock market opportunities.

The housing slump has hurt public budgets, as depressed property values and lowered homeowners' equity cut proceeds from real estate and sales taxes.

In 2009, 25 states are facing shortfalls, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. That pain trickles down to local governments, which increasingly look to privatize services they traditionally have performed.

By outsourcing a prison, states can save as much as a quarter of its cost, Avondale Partners analyst Kevin Campbell said, which is why private prison companies boosted their market share to 7.2 percent in 2006 from 6.5 percent in 2001-2003.

States might begin a new wave of prison privatization sooner than in the 2001 recession because the United States is still suffering from prison overcrowding as a result of that last downturn, Campbell said.

So at a national level, private prison companies and Wall Street investment analysts view the housing market downturn and pressure on state and local government as a marketing opportunity. Great! If that's true we'll see even more local officials who want to subsidize private companies instead of just pay for basic taxpayer services.

I don't believe for a second that private prisons can operate at 25% less cost than government and turn a profit, particularly for county jails where they must still meet requirements by the Texas Commission on Jail Standards like everybody else. That's a marketing pitch, not an assessment of actual contract costs (or else a reflection of cherrypicking the least dangerous, least costly inmates). I'm not opposed to private contracting as a crisis management option, but it makes no sense to put your county in a position where a constitutionally required service - the local county jail - is owned and controlled by a private business.

The private prison industry spent more than a million dollars lobbying Texas officials in 2007, reports Bob Libal over at Texas Prison Bidness. Expect that number to increase if the economy tanks, if it's true that nationally these companies view such indicators as a marketing opportunity.

Counties cannot contract away liability for the jail nor its expenses, the can only contract away control. Private prisons low-ball up-front bids and underpay employees to cut costs, but that only goes so far. After the initial investments are made, when the contract comes up for renewal, the contracting agency is pretty much stuck with the decision, having put all its eggs in the private company's basket. And if anybody sues, the taxpayers are still the ultimate deep pockets who are accountable.

When counties have enough money to function properly, the economics of private jails make little sense. It's when times are hard, apparently, that the idea of getting a new jail for free starts to sound attractive, but if there's no such thing as a free lunch, there's damn sure no such thing as a free jail.

Grayson County Judge pushing irresponsible jail building scheme

Grayson County Judge Drue Bynum has been promoting a bizarre solution to local jail overcrowding, trying to convince the public that the county can expand the jail without paying for it ("it's free, trust me") by partnering with a private contractor. He's even trying to get Grayson County College to give away land to a contractor to build the private facility. Reported the Sherman Herald-Democrat ("County judge approaches Grayson County College trustees about donating land for a new county jail," Feb. 21), Bynum:

wants to see the county go with a plan that involves private financing to keep the tax payers from having to pay to increase the size of the jail. Getting free land at the airport would help that happen, he said.

When trustees questioned why the county didn't use its own land at the airport, Bynum said the answer is simple. The land that the college owns doesn't sit as close to the runway as the county property does.

Building the jail on the county property, Bynum said, might (his emphasis) mean that some companies that might have otherwise looked at the airport would go somewhere else.

Bynum noted that the college has some land behind the Viticulture Building that would be a good place for the jail. He said 50 acres would be great for a jail built to accommodate up to 1,500 inmates.

Trustees asked why the county needed to build such a large jail when the county doesn't need that many beds. Bynum explained that a private company would have to build many more beds than Grayson County needs to be able to make a profit off the jail. He said the additional beds then would be offered to other entities at prices above what Grayson County would pay.

Trustees wanted to know if the county had considered just building to suit its needs and not worrying about the private funding. Bynum said all options have been considered, but he doesn't want to see tax payers foot the bill for the jail.

This is an unbelievably bad idea based on an economically flawed premise, that taxpayers won't "foot the bill for the jail."

Of course they will! For starters, he's asking the college to give some private company the land for free. But even more than that, for the company to pay its construction debt, the county must pay for its prisoners, which means it must pay the cost of housing the inmates (which it would have to pay anyway) PLUS the company's profits.

Whether the county or a private contractor operates the facility, it still must meet minimum standards set by the Texas Commission on Jail Standards, so it won't be any cheaper to operate (except to the extent that a private company pays its employees less than deputies make - a marginal benefit at best in the scheme of things that's wiped out if the company takes a profit).

And of course, if the company can't find other entities willing to lease the beds at an inflated price, the county will be stuck with the full tab for space it doesn't need, since it will still need to operate a jail.

What the Judge proposes is a massive gamble his county should reject. Let John McCain be elected and get immigration reform, for example, and the private prison market could see a massive glut in Texas overnight as detention centers empty.

Like other Texas counties, Grayson could solve its short-term jail crisis just by reducing its rate of pretrial detention. Grayson lies at the extreme end of a statewide trend of increased pretrial detention. Statistician Tony Fabelo reported recently that "overall jail population increased 18.6% between 2000-2007, he said, the number of pretrial detainees increased 49.2% over the same period." A consultant hired by the county found that 73% of jail inmates were pretrial detainees, meaning they had been convicted of no crime and could leave if they could afford bail.

From these numbers I don't think Grayson actually needs to build a new jail. But if they did, taxpayers are better off if the county just builds the jail that it needs. It doesn't make sense to me to subsidize some speculative mega-jail as an entrepreneurial venture, and I hope Judge Bynum's colleagues on the commissioners court shoot it down.

Grayson may turn to Geo Group for jail expansion

Having written yesterday that Texans taxation revulsion has begun to run up against their incarceration addiction at county jails and in the state prison system, I should mention that several other small to mid-sized Texas counties considering expensive jail expansions, starting with Grayson County, a rural/suburban county on the edge of the Red River bordering Oklahoma.

In Grayson the commissioners court is considering what I think is the worst case option for taxpayers in the medium to long-run: Expanding the jail through privatization instead of voter approval. Reported the Sherman Herald Democrat ("GC jail discussed," Oct. 14):

Grayson County Commissioners Court has said it does not believe taxpayers would vote to build the jail, which could add 30 cents per $100 property valuation to tax bills. So commissioners are looking at a private company to build it, and perhaps to run it.

A $140,000 study the court commissioned recommended changes and efficiencies in the county’s criminal justice system. These improvements could significantly reduce the jail population. However, the study concluded that even if the county adopted all those suggestions, the current jail is in poor condition and the county still would need to add maximum security cells.

As in most other counties in the state with overcrowded jails, pretrial detention is the main cause of Grayson's overcrowding woes, the paper reported. "The jail study the county commissioned says pretrial detainees (those who have not been convicted) comprise the majority of inmates in the jail at 73.2 percent."

Regular readers know that increased pretrial detention - a decision made on a case by case basis by local judges - is the main cause of local jail overcrowding in Texas, not increasing crime. In 1995, just 30.3% of Texas county jail inmates statewide were incarcerated awaiting trial. Today that figure is 51% statewide, but according to the consultant it's nearly half again higher in Grayson County.

These are people who have not yet been convicted of any crime and could be released on bail or personal bonds. Reported the paper, the consultant recommended the county "create or increase use of citation release (also called field release), pretrial release program, electronic monitoring, day reporting program, inmate case management and a case expediter, drug court, mental health court, community service work program, in-jail work program, weekend DWI program and a re-entry program."

But really, it's simpler than that: Judges in Grayson could resolve the problem immediately by releasing lower level, nonviolent offenders from the jail. They don't need any new programs, though some of the ones suggested would be helpful; judges can already release more defendants on bail or personal bond if they choose to do so. The only people who benefit from the current approach are the bail bondsman.

I'm also pleased to notice leaders in this growing, suburbanizing county expressing more fundamental concerns about a too-high incarceration rate:

Several audience members questioned whether Grayson County has an unacceptably high percentage of its population in jail. Tim McGraw, who was county judge in 2005 when the study was commissioned, said ... one of the things that shows that is you have Collin County that has a population that’s four times the size of Grayson and has around 750-800 prisoners. We’re a fourth their size and have about 400 prisoners. I don’t think we have that many extra criminals in Grayson County.”

Although McGraw was speaking off the cuff and without notes, he did not exaggerate the statistics. In fact, Collin County’s estimated 2006 population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau is about 700,000. Grayson County’s estimated 2006 population is 118,000. A check with Collin County Jail Administrator and Chief Deputy Randy Clark revealed that Collin County, which is projected to have a population of a million by 2011, just increased the size of its jail to 1,298 total beds. Friday morning’s prisoner census was 930.

Excellent points: IMO McGraw hits the nail on the head. Jail overcrowding in Grayson and most other counties is caused by local officials' decisions more often than increasing population or crime.

Finally, it's interesting to see that recent troubles at the Texas Youth Commission haven't prevented other elected officials from courting the Geo Group, which has been identified as the likely contractor if Grayson County decides to privatize the jail. Glenn Melancon, a professor at Southeastern Oklahoma State University, issued a handout I'll try to get ahold of that rightly criticized the idea:

Some questioned the wisdom of privatizing the jail. They said they feared a private group would be beyond public accountability. Private businesses that run prisons — particularly The Geo Group Inc. which has been mentioned as a possible firm to run the county would contract to run the jail — have come under fire recently.

Texas Youth Commission, a state agency, closed Coke County Juvenile Center in West Texas, citing squalid conditions and is conducting a criminal investigation of Geo, its operator. The state also canceled the $8 million annual contract it has held with Geo since 1996, the Associated Press reported Friday.

Melanon, in a handout at the meeting, stated that the Miami Herald reported that the state of Florida has accused Geo Group of over-billing and breaking its Sunshine (open government) Laws for not turning over audit records, lawsuit billings and court injunctions.

Tulsa County, Okla. contracted with Corrections Corporation of America to run its jail. The costs rose 42 percent from 2001 to 2005 and the county now has decided to avoid the $3.7 million budget deficit the increases created and run the jail itself, Melanon’s handout states.

Responding to jailers’ questions, Gary said that no contract could be entered with a private business unless he signed off on it.

And, he said, he wouldn’t do that unless the company agreed to hire all current jail staff at current salaries. However, he explained after further questions, a private firm would not be able to offer the state pension fund they have all paid into. It would have its own.

Others in the crowd said they concerned that when a private company needed additional workers, they would not pay enough to attract high quality professionals. Bynum said private businesses would be aware of what the labor market commanded in this area and would pay competitive wages and benefits.

The county has hired private consultant Herb Bristow of Waco to help negotiate a contract between the county and a private firm. Gary and Bynum agreed that the county cannot contract its liability for ensuring a constitutionally run jail. And Gary said that the county could still run the jail even it looked to a private company to build it.

Another aspect of private jails that worried some was the prospect it would lobby for rules that would increase jail populations to raise profit. Some questioned whether it would be more effective to spend money the jail would cost on prevention and treatment programs and the alternative strategies outlined in the study.

I've requested the consultant's report under the public information act, and will be interested in learning more about Grayson's problems and what the Waco consultant proposed. But I think it's a big mistake to hinge the county's carceral future on the Geo Group or any other private company.

To me, if a jail is needed, taxpayers should fund it and the Sheriff should operate it. But in Grayson's case the data shows there are many solutions to be tried before new jail building could be justified based on need. Rather, tuff-on-crime political calculations by local judges and prosecutors are the real cause of Grayson taxpayers spending more than $3,000 per day to rent jail cells outside the county. I disagree with the route the Grayson commissioners court is taking, but community angst should be aimed equally at those courthouse officials whose decisions actually caused the problem, not just the Sheriff and commissioners who must manage the expensive results.

RELATED: See Grits best practices for reducing jail overcrowding, Part 1 and Part 2.

ALSO RELATED: Local jails are full and shipping prisoners elsewhere in Hays and Navarro Counties.

Grayson County applies to create mental heath court

Grayson County in northeast Texas has applied for grant funding to create a mental health court to treat the large percentage of jail inmates in the county suffering from serious mental illness. Reported the Sherman Herald Democrat ("Commissioners consider grant application for mental health court," 12-11):

In the supporting material for the federal grant, [Adult probation director Dennis] Cowhig stated that an assessment of the Grayson County Jail found that more than 100 of the 452 inmates housed at the county jail at the time of the assessment had some mental health issues.

“This target population (who are likely to re-offend) has historically been subjected to the same criminal justice sanctions as other offenders, but a growing number of stakeholders, led by the County Judge, have begun to question the appropriateness of not taking into consideration the person’s mental health condition and/or co-occurring substance abuse disorder, without which the offense might not have been committed,” the application states.

The application says, “The target population of the Grayson County Mental Health Court is male or female, age 17 or older, who are in a pre-release/disposition or post-release/ disposition status. Only those who are Grayson County residents with charges of a misdemeanor or non-violent felony as defined by statute who meet priority population as set forth by the Texas Health and Safety Code will be eligible participants in the Mental Health Court.”

Those who will get priority for the program will be individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar, major depression, and/or mental retardation. The Court, Cowhig said, plans to serve 40 people during the course of the grant.

Personally I like this approach because it gives the system a chance to account for mitigating factors regarding crimes committed by the mentally ill. Punishment only works as deterrence for those who think rationally about cause and effect. That's just not always the case for someone with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, so punishment without focusing on the organic illness won't usually keep the unwanted behavior from recurring.

Other counties have tried different approaches to dealt with the mentally ill, but everywhere in the state officials are struggling with how to handle this critical group. A special mental health court opened up this summer in Houston. Dallas now provides medications for mentally ill defendants for several days after they leave local custody to prevent disrupting their treatment. Travis County received grant funding recently to create a specialized public defender for mentally ill defendants. And Bexar County established a 24-hour outpatient crisis care center aimed at the same population.

I'm curious: What other local efforts are readers aware of for dealing with mentally ill defendants in Texas? How do you think courts should best handle indviduals with serious mental illness who commit crimes, particularly those charged with only non-violent offenses?

MORE: Wretched of the Earth approves of Grayson's mental health court but says it won't be enough. "Adequate representation (do the attorneys representing mentally ill defendants have training in mental illness, et cetera?) and a change of philosophy within the District Attorney's office are also key."