Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/11/1985Thursday, April 11, 1985 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Special Session at.the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Thursday, April 11, 1985, at 10:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and William C. Wodtke, Jr. Also present were Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order and announced that it was called to hear a presentation re overcrowding at the County Jail and determine possible alternatives. General Services Director "Sonny" Dean informed the Board that on the 3rd of April we were cited by the Department of Corrections for overcrowding at our jail and given a time period to comply. He, therefore, requested Douglas Wright of the Department of Corrections to come down and address the Commission, advise us of what we could expect, and discuss remedies other counties in the same situation have used. Mr. Wright, D.O.C. Jail Inspector, reported that he has inspected the Indian River County jail on two occasions, plus visiting it on different occasions where inmates have made written complaints, and he has found the County jail to be administratively and procedurally efficient and functioning well under the leadership of Director Dean, Administrator Wright, and Captain Baird. He felt the County does have a good staff, and noted that the recently approved addition of seven people to the staff prevented an aggravated violation from occurring. Mr. Wright stated that the deficiencies in his most recent report relate to structural and overcrowding, and while he is aware the County is in the construction phase of a new facility, if the APR 111985 BOOL( 161 OF APR 111985 . BOOK 6 0 F' ,f 54 present rate of increase of prisoners continues, the day the County moves into the new facility, he believed it will be overcrowded. Mr. Wright emphasized that something must be done to increase the capacity of the jail now. Its approved capacity is 66; the day of inspection the inmate count was 86; and the highest count in the recent past was 103. He, therefore, had to cite the jail, and if the population is not reduced to 66 within ten days, it is his duty to notify the Attorney General's Office, and they then will take action as they see fit. The ten day period ends this coming Saturday when he will re -inspect. Mr. Wright further informed the Board that litigation has resulted with thirty counties over these same type deficiencies, and something must be done to reduce the inmate population, not just for reasons of inmate safety, but also staff safety. In the last six weeks there have been two cases of injuries to inmates arising from the fact that they could not house according to their special problem. Mr. Wright further commented that he did not believe Indian River County has a County probation officer, and he believed one could be helpful in reducing the population of the jail. He clarified that the Board can hire a probation officer; the state provides the qualifications; and the County funds this, but the offender can be assessed for the cost of supervision. Commissioner Bird felt there are some probation officers working in the County now, but Mr. Wright explained that they are working for the D.O.C.; and they only supervise felons, not misdemeanor offenders. Commissioner Wodtke noted that we have felons in the County jail, but Mr. Wright pointed out that they are there on reduced sentences; they are not there over a year; and if a felon is not in state prison, he is not a state prisoner. Commissioner Wodtke stated that the felons we have in our jail are there because the state lowered the sentence to 364 2 days, and Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that the new state sentencing guidelines for many offenses set the sentences at 364 days which automatically puts the felons in the county jail as opposed to the state jail system. Commissioner Wodtke expressed -his displeasure that the state changed the guidelines which increased our jail population, but the state won't build the jails, and the state probation officers won't do the job, and now they are saying we are in violation. He realized this is not Mr. Wright's problem, however. Mr. Wright commented that the Judge can cite reasons and deviate from the sentencing guidelines in some cases, and some of these prisoners could fit in a community control program that the state does supervise. He continued that a second possibility is a minimum custody facility for low risk prisoners where people can work at their jobs during the day and return to custody at night. Such a facility can have regular walls, ceilings, etc., a dormitory type thing, where one officer can supervise a large number of inmates and some costs can be assessed the prisoners for being in that program. Commissioner Wodtke inquired if the guidelines are flexible enough to allow the facility to be a standard house, a tent, etc., and Mr. Wright noted that one county had an old armory where they put such prisoners. Mr. Wright continued that another possibility is an "over -sight" or "fast-track" committee that can be appointed by the court to determine which prisoners are low risk and can be released to report in periodically. He felt there is a need to reactivate this process to speed up the system and get prisoners out of the facilities. An additional possibility is a percentage bail where the offender can post 10% of the amount with the court and, if he shows up for trial, he would get all or most of his money back. Another alternative is R.O.R. (Release on Own Recognizance) for going to a drug program or detox center, etc., and the final possibly is speeding up the courts. Mr. Wright 3 BOOK U APR 11 1995 BooK Eifl FYF G 54 commented that he had some information indicating that some individuals have been kept in jail two weeks after a nolle prosequi, i.e., after the charges were dropped. Considerable discussion ensued as to how the paperwork is processed through the Clerk's office after the Judge passes sentence and what can be done to decrease the interval between sentencing and the processing of prisoners so that they do not stay in jail any longer than is absolutely necessary. Captain Baird felt it takes quite a while for the Clerk to type up the Judge's Orders and the necessary casework, and when this is done, the papers are forwarded to the jail. Administrator Wright believed the new data processing program will solve some of this problem, and Director Dean confirmed that we are in the process of putting in a software package to put the jail in direct contact with the Clerk's office so that an inmate's status can be updated immediately. Commissioner Bird inquired as to the normal time between receiving an Order and a prisoner leaving for state prison, and Captain Baird stated that this is usually within a day. There is a private prisoner transport service, and they run to Lake Butler every day but Friday. In further discussion, it was emphasized that no one is trying to pinpoint the blame, but just to figure out how the problem can be dealt with. It is possible more people are needed in the Clerk's office. Chairman Lyons asked if there was anything the parole people could do to cut down on the interval between trial and sentencing. He again stressed that we are asking not in a negative way, but a positive -way what we can do. Mr. Wright agreed that we must identify the problem, and if the problem is that the probation officers are not turning the P.S.I's around for the court to act, then they can handle that. He felt the normal time to turn a P.S.I. around is 30 days. 4 Robert Phelan, supervisor of the local Probation Parole Department, wished to state for the record that the local Parole Department has never failed to get a pre -sentence investigation to the court on the assigned sentencing date. He stated that the normal turn around time is 28 days.and 21 days on a jail case, and he believed the case previously alluded to was where someone had been continued at his own request. Mr. Phelan again emphasized that the pre -sentence investigations have been 1000 completed by the times requested.. Chairman Lyons just wished to ask if that much time is necessary, and Mr. Phelan stated that it is not for jail presentence investigation; that only requires 21 days. They have talked to the Judge about this and there may be a change in policy. Commissioner Scurlock noted that obviously this is a sensitive subject, but he believed we will need better cooperation from everyone - the State's Attorney, the Public Defender, the Clerk, etc., - because we must tighten up the system. Mr. Wright again brought up the possibility of diversionary programs. He stressed that he is not here to place blame, but just to reduce the population in the county jail. Commissioner Bird requested that the "fast-track" committee be explained - its function - whether it helps, etc. Captain Baird informed the Board that the Fast Track Committee was just a committee made up of a representative of the County Court, the Circuit Court, the Public Defender, the State's Attorney, and the jail staff, and they met once a week and went through the jail roster to see if there was a way to expedite the process and determine if it was appropriate to release someone. Captain Baird stated that this worked for a few months, and then he believed the committee was disbanded in mid September. In the ensuing questions as to why it was disbanded, it was. felt that this committee might have been formed at Judge 5 APR 11 X905 Book J APP 111985 . BOOK 60 FmrjE. 5 6 Stikelether's suggestion and then disbanded when he was running for reelection. It was generally agreed that the new judges should be approached in regard to reinstating such a committee. Circuit Judge Charles Smith wished to present some facts for the Board's information. He quoted statistics which demonstrate that we have had a 50% increase in felonies in the County in one year. In 1983 there were 306 cases actually appearing before a judge, and in 1984, 503, or a 64% increase. This increase is the number one problem, and Judge Smith stated that the second problem is the new sentencing guidelines promulgated by the Supreme Court. The Judges are tied by those guidelines, and cannot sentence felons into the state prison except in extreme cases. As to Mr. Wright's comment that the Judges can deviate from the guidelines and sentence some to a community control program supervised by the state, Judge Smith stated that the appellate courts are not upholding the judges when they do this. Judge Smith continued that we have made use of the weekend work program for about a year, and those offenders don't even get inside the jails. There are some cases however, that just cannot be put on weekend work programs, etc., and the only alternative is jail. He stressed that almost all prisoners in our county jail are felons. The misdemeanors are R.O.R.; (released on own recognizance) and as to a percentage bail, many of those released on low bonds, do not appear and that means deputies have to find them again. Judge Smith did feel it is possible to speed up the P.S.I's by possibly a week, but stated that they can't do them more often as they just do not have sufficient personnel. In regard to the log jam at the Clerk's office, Judge Smith commented that he had asked the Clerk why they can't call over and -say a nolle prosequi has been issued, but the County Jail will not accept telephoned releases; they must have the paperwork. Judge Smith felt the County will have to face up to this problem by temporarily putting prisoners in trailers, other county's jails, or an old motel or stockade of some sort. There 6 is a more modern method that can be used in some cases, but it is an experimental program which will affect only a few prisoners - the Monroe County electronic collar, which can be strapped on a prisoner and connected to a telephone so that if he moves more than 150' from the telephone, it alerts a probation officer. Judge Smith continued to emphasize that the judges will cooperate in any way possible, but there are some things that can't be speeded up. For instance, we have three prisoners waiting for first degree murder trials, and the time before a first degree murder case comes to trial averages about one year. He noted that when he took over half the felonies at the beginning of this year, he instructed the Clerk that all the sentencing paperwork is to be out by the next day; obviously it can't be done the same day they are in court, but probably can be done the next day or the day after. He felt the Board could instruct the Clerk to pay overtime and have her employees work longer hours. In addition, Judge Smith reported that he has told the Public Defender if there is anyone who wants to plead no contest or guilty, the judges will handle this on a daily basis; of course, this will involve additional expense to transport those prisoners. In conclusion, Judge Smith assured the Board that all the judges realize we are facing a crisis; they are willing to cooperate; and they certainly will agree to reactivate the "fast track" committee if that will help. Chairman Lyons expressed his appreciation of the judges' cooperation. Public Defender Bruce Smith believed his office and that of the State's Attorney are the ones most familiar with whom should be released or not released, and he agreed the "fast track" committee may not be a bad idea. He pointed out, however, that often the State's Attorney and Public Defender try to work this out beforehand. As to people sitting in jail awaiting trial, he emphasized that they are doing their best to speed this up, but 7 BOOK PA;E 547 APR 11 � � J r APR1 85 BOOK 6 0 Nf'U' 54 did not see how they could lessen the time between the arrest and the trial any more as they do need time to prepare the case. Attorney Brand.enburg asked if the Public Defender's office monitors the cases such as those mentioned where they were nolle prosequied but the forms were not received and the prisoners sat in jail longer than they should have. Public Defender Smith stated that they try their best, but can't keep track of everyone's job and.some do drop through the cracks. Mr. Smith believed the weekend work program is about the best way to reduce the jail population, and he believed it has been working. He then presented the Board a copy of a jail work program proposed by Judge Defriest of St. Lucie County, which would extend the weekend work program into a seven day a week program. Mr. Smith then addressed in detail the actual steps and timing regarding sentencing and paperwork, and he felt the delays actually are no one's fault; there simply isn't enough personnel. Commissioner Scurlock asked Jail Inspector Wright what could be the minimum financial impact on the county for a temporary facility, i.e., what is the minimum acceptable facility, the minimum furnishings and equipment, the capacity, etc., that we would have to have. Mr. Wright again pointed out that this could only be for low risk prisoners, and further noted that it would be necessary to look at how the prisoners could be fed"without having to put in a. kitchen. Basically, what is required is meeting fire safety standards, lighting requirements, beds and essentials. Commissioner Scurlock believed it has been indicated that just about everybody who can be let out is out already, and what do we do with the rest? Bruce Colton, Assistant State's Attorney, came before the Board in behalf of State Attorney Robert Stone. He emphasized that the system can be speeded up to the point where it doesn't work any more, and he did not feel it can be speeded up much more than it is now. Possibly building a stockade would be a step in F7 o, the -right direction. However, if we moved everybody into a stockade today, we probably still would be over what is allowed by the D.O.C. in a few months. Mr. Colton noted that some other counties are saying we are doing all we can do, and if you want to sue us, go ahead, and he believed thirty suits have been filed so far. Mr. Colton felt some of the D.O.C. regulations are unreasonable; he clarified that he is not suggesting the County just defy what the D.O.C. is telling them to do, but he would suggest the the County take every reasonable step to reduce the jail population and then say we have done all we can and sue us if you must. Mr. Colton noted that Judge Smith has addressed the explosion in the crime rate in the county; no one foresaw a 50% increase. The same thing has happened to law enforcement, the court system, and the Clerk's office; they are all caught in the same position, and all may need to come to the Board for an extra allocation to hire more personnel in order to cope. Mr. Colton again stressed that they would be in favor of programs that would reduce the jail population, but are opposed to just any crash program. He pointed out that people almost never go to jail the first time they are accused of a crime, and we cannot just let these people out while we debate the merits of the system. Also in regard to those who commit misdemeanors, Mr. Colton noted that some of them need to go to jail, and the State Attorney .is not in favor of simply clearing them out. The proposed expanded work program seems to be a good idea, and he believed that program could pay for itself. He also felt we should look into the alternative of leasing mobile home facilities, which he believed was done in Martin County. A stockade could lessen the problem, and he felt some non-violent felons could be put in such a facility. Mr. Colton emphasized that the State Attorney is trying to cooperate, but felt only so much can be done. Clerk Freda Wright concurred with Judge Smith's statements re the tremendous growth in the felony division and stated that 9 SOK APR 111985 Boos I she is working with the judges to expedite the paperwork as much as possible. The clerk who goes to Plea Day does not go to court the next day in order to try to get the work out more quickly. Mrs. Wright pointed out that the Clerk's Office is well aware that they need more help, but an additional problem is that there is no place to put them. Chairman Lyons noted that there is no question that we need to speed up the process and the paperwork, and if there is no space where the Clerk's department is located presently, possibly it will have to be found somewhere else. He emphasized that we have a commitment to solve this problem, and felt we need more particulars from the Clerk as to exactly how we can go about solving these problems. He did believe the new computer system will help. Clerk Wright commented that in the past the Sheriff's Department had personnel in the courtroom when the sentencing was done, and they would relay information to the jail, but it appears this can't be done now. She also felt there sometimes may be a gap between the time the paperwork is done and when it is picked up by the Sheriff's Department. Assistant States Attorney Joe Wild confirmed that in other counties where he has worked, there was a jail representative in court who relayed the information. Considerable discussion ensued as to the dangers involved with handling releases over the telephone, and Captain Baird reported that he has been instructed that this is a very improper procedure and told to stop. He continued that as a temporary measure, however, he has worked out an arrangement with the Circuit Court Clerks. They write a docket that goes on during the -day, and the transferring officer at the end of the day will remain to pick up a rough copy of the clerk's working docket. This is far from totally reliable, but it may help. Commissioner Bird felt it may be necessary to provide some temporary housing but because of the logistics involved with 10 77 serving meals and the need for staff, he wondered if it might not be better to put some kind of modular structure at the current jail site rather than have an isolated facility at the new site. Commissioner Scurlock expressed the belief that whatever we do is not going to be temporary. Administrator Wright asked about some kind of stockade. He did not feel there is any question that we are going to have to build something of the sort and did not believe we want to spend money on temporary structures. Some discussion followed regarding the costs of building opposed to renting, and Director Dean stated that modular buildings are designed any size you want; they cost $17.00 a sq. ft. and can be leased for 60t per sq. ft. per month, or about $1,800 per month. Administrator Wright pointed out that any facility would have to be staffed and what he would like to build is a simple masonry stockade building, about 2,500-3,000 sq, ft., at the new jail site. He agreed it would be inconvenient and we would have to cater meals, but then it would be there when the jail is built. Commissioner Scurlock felt we should do what we can and then tell the D.O.C. we have done all we can. Administrator Wright asked Jail Inspector Wright what has happened in other counties, and Mr. Wright reported that the state has had good cooperation from the majority of those they have been involved with., Each county has its own special problems,•and all he can say is that Indian River County is going to have to reduce its jail population. He urged that contact be made with the Assistant Attorney General in regard to any possible litigation as he could give more insight into the legal ramifications involved. Commissioner Wodtke noted that he had believed when we were planning and building a new jail that we were planning it properly, and he did not see why we should be required to spend 11 APR 111985 Boos. 0 Fq.cr5. J APR 111985 BooK 60 PnF 552 anything additional for even more jail facilities between now and the time the new jail is completed. He did agree that we can have a "Fast Track". Committee or something of that type, plus an expanded work release program, etc., to alleviate the situation, but he could not see spending a lot of money in building another facility out at the new jail site right next to a jail we don't even have yet. He noted that the Marine Corps and Army use tents and didn't see why something of that sort wouldn't suffice for temporary housing. He emphasized that we have put forth a good effort, but the state is not meeting their responsibility in providing the jail system for the felons, and they are not giving us any dollars for our facilities. Commissioner Scurlock agreed that saying we are going to get some chicken wire and some dogs and fence in the prisoners undoubtedly would be the most popular approach, but he believed we always talked about eventually providing a minimum security facility and possibly we should take that step now as it seems we will need something more permanent. Chairman Lyons noted that when the projections for jail space were made in 1982, no one foresaw the dramatic increase in crime on which Judge Smith reported today. The sentencing guidelines changed, and crime exploded. Commissioner Wodtke continued to point out the unfairness of the new sentencing guidelines which puts the burden on the counties, and Administrator Wright noted that the counties always have been the stepchild. He felt realistically we must face this and expand our facility and employees, especially since we almost had a 19 year old hang himself in the jail two weeks ago because we didn't have the proper place to put him. We were just lucky that we caught him in time. Commissioner Wodtke believed such a situation could occur whether we have extra beds or not. 12 M r M Commissioner Bowman commented that we have had seven or more alternatives given us, and she felt we may need a special committee to study this. Chairman Lyons noted that no matter what happens we are not going to have facilities to meet the requirements of the Jail Inspector either by Friday or 90 days from Friday. We will be in violation, but he did not feel we should panic. Commissioner Bird noted some good alternatives have been offered today, and stated he would like to try to initiate as many of these as we can as a first step and then consider additional housing as a second step. Chairman Lyons felt strongly that if it is decided we must have additional housing, it should be done in the way that is most efficient and makes the.most sense for the long run so that it can become an integral part of the jail system. Commissioner Wodtke asked if we can also look into a stockade type thing and possibly have a cooperative effort with St. Lucie or another county. He favored a joint approach somewhere that can be done collectively. Chairman Lyons pointed out that the facility cost is the smallest part of the overall costs involved. The man hours spent running back and forth must be considered, and there are problems with a remote location unless people are sentenced for a long period of time. Commissioner Wodtke believed that standards are dramatically different for minimum security, and possibly we could continue to utilize the old jail. Chairman Lyons stated that is the last thing he would want to do. He could live with putting something temporary where the new jail is going to be, but he did not want to start by having two jails or we will live with that cost forever. Commissioner Bird expressed his agreement that anything we build should be something permanent for the future. He asked if the Administrator needed a list of specific instructions. 13 APR 111985, BOOK 60 F,� u.553 APR 111985 BOOK 6 0 ra,cF554 Administrator Wright believed the Board basically has said do everything possible to reduce the jail population without building a building., and if that doesn't work, then come back with a plan. Commissioner Scurlock stated that he would plug all this into the Financial Advisory Committee, and Chairman Lyons expressed his willingness to continue working with staff on matters pertaining to the jail. Some discussion ensued as to the Clerk's problems and her need for -additional space, and Clerk Wright confirmed that her needs are growing not only in felony, but in the civil division also. The Chairman stated that he would be glad to meet with the Clerk to see what can be done to address her needs. He expressed his thanks to everyone for their input and their cooperation. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 o'clock A.M. ATTEST: Clerk 14 Chairman