President's Message - Fall Issue 2002
County Officials Must Step Up During
2003 Session
During the political
campaigns of the last several months, we heard much about
improving education in Alabama. That's not unusual. I
really don't remember a single election year when education
was not the top issue throughout the state.
Now that we've turned our attention
to the start of a new legislative term, it is only fair
that we -- as county officials -- make a clear statement
about what we believe to be the most important issue facing
our state right now. Because, when the legislative session
starts, we really don't want anyone to be surprised by
our actions.
This important issue did gain
some attention during the recent campaigns. In fact, the
re-elected Attorney General of the state focused his television
advertisements on the need to reform Alabama's laws regarding
the sentencing of persons convicted of crimes. But even
his focus is a bit different from the Association’s.
This issue -- the terrible
overcrowding that exists in our county jails and the poor
record the Alabama Department of Corrections has in removing
prisoners in a timely fashion -- has reached a critical
stage. In late October, there were more than 1,500 state
inmates in county jails in violation of the court's order
that the prisoners be removed within 30 days after sentencing.
To put that in perspective,
the number of prisoners in violation of the court order
represented the size of two average prison facilities.
Stated another way, it would require the construction
of two average-sized new prisons in Alabama just to absorb
the backlog of state prisoners that exists right now.
That is to say nothing about the growth tomorrow or the
next day or the next.
So the time for waiting has
passed.
Some ten years ago, a lawsuit
was filed on behalf of counties seeking the removal of
state prisoners from county jails in a timely fashion.
That lawsuit, which continues today, has cost the counties
hundreds of thousands of dollars. In some regards, the
lawsuit has impacted the number of prisoners in county
jails. Certainly there have been times during the last
ten years when the number of state prisoners in county
jails was at a manageable level. And one can only assume
that it was the lawsuit that helped reach those acceptable
levels.
But the lawsuit has not brought
any long-term solution to the problem. As soon as the
number of prisoners was reduced through some court action,
the numbers quickly began to climb again when the court
hammer was lifted. We've watched this cycle for years.
The department of corrections
has -- at times -- focused its attention on this problem
and has been able to comply with the law and the court's
directives for short periods of time. But there has never
been any sustained compliance and there are few signs
that any sustained compliance is around the corner.
The Legislature has been unable
to tackle the real causes of prison and jail overcrowding
-- a lack of adequate funding and the inability of our
state's leaders to support alternative methods of punishment
for those convicted of crimes. Without BOTH of those --
and the record shows that right now we have neither --
county jails will continue to be the safety valve for
an overcrowded, under-funded prison system.
As county officials, we really
face two choices. We either continue to do what we have
done or we look for some new avenue. And I, for one, believe
any new avenue we chose cannot be worse that the road
we have traveled for the last decade.
The real problem lies in how
our state law provides for the custody of a person once
he or she has been convicted of a crime against the state.
That law says the department will "thereupon" assume custody.
But in the real world, "thereupon" has come to mean "whenever"
or "after while".
County sheriffs do not feel
they are authorized to deliver the prisoners to the department
without authorization from the department. Now, there
have been a few isolated incidents when prisoners have
been dropped off, but that happens only in extreme circumstances.
So even though the prisoner
is the responsibility of the state, the county must house,
feed and care for him or her until the state sends word
that it is ready to accept the delivery of the prisoner.
In some cases, the OK from the department doesn't come
until months after the person has been tried and convicted.
It is simply time that this
portion of Alabama law be changed. It is time to authorize
the sheriffs of Alabama to deliver the prisoners to the
department -- even without the department's approval --
if some reasonable time has lapsed between the conviction
date and this new "drop-off" date.
We are not looking to flood
the department with inmates. And we are not looking to
move a prisoner two hours after the trial is completed.
But it also is not reasonable for the department to expect
counties to build new jails, see those new jails overcrowded
and then build new jails again simply because the department
will not accept its prisoners. The local taxpayers deserve
to see their money spent on local expenses.
Remember that once a person
is tried, convicted and sentenced of a state crime, they
have become the responsibility of the 4 million residents
of the entire state. And the residents should share that
cost evenly. The residents of one county should not shoulder
the cost for a prisoner who is the responsibility of the
state.
During the 2003 session, county
officials must unite and demand that some action be taken
on this most serious problem. We have waited long enough
for others to solve our problem, it is time that we step
forward and move to solve it ourselves.
The session begins in March.
|
