|
|
DeKalb County, Illinois |
Minutes of the DeKalb County
|
|
The Ad Hoc Jail Study Committee of the DeKalb County Board met on Thursday, March 20, 2003 @ 7:00p.m. in the Legislative Center’s Gathertorium. Chairman Sue Leifheit called the meeting to order. Members present were Marlene Allen, Ray Bockman, William Feithen, Michael Haines, Robert Hutcheson, Kenneth Johnson, Lt. Joyce Klein, Sheriff Roger Scott, Linda Swenson, Ruth Anne Tobias and Donald Thomas. Mr. Jeff Metzger and Mr. Ron Matekaitis were absent. Others present were Mark Goldman, Len Witke and Leona Ketterl, Debbie King, Mr. Peter Paulsen, and Don Bennett and various people from the surrounding neighborhood of the Sycamore Campus.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTESMoved by Mr. Hutcheson, seconded by Mr. Haines, and it was carried unanimously to approve the minutes from the December 11, 2002 meeting.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDAMoved by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Lt. Joyce Klein, and it was carried unanimously to approve the agenda.
PRESENTATION OF JAIL POPULATION REVIEWMr. Len Witke of Durrant and Mr. Mark Goldman of Goldman & Associates presented the Interim Report on the DeKalb County Jail Study for the committee (on file in the County Board Office).
Mr. Witke said that the key questions that they looked at were if the DeKalb County Jail needed more beds? If so, how many beds, and what types of beds are needed? Are there additional alternatives to incarceration that can eliminate this need to build more jail beds? If more beds are needed, should the existing jail be renovated and expanded, or should the beds be built elsewhere? What would be the initial and operational costs of a Jail expansion, a new jail, and alternatives to incarceration?
This evening’s agenda presents initial answers to the key questions. Those being, who is in the DeKalb County Jail; how is this jail population changing; what alternatives to incarceration are being used now, and what alternatives can be added; how many beds are needed through the year 2020; and what are the physical conditions of the existing jail?
Mr. Mark Goldman then began the review of their findings. In the population profile they analyzed the jail now. They found that the electronic home monitoring program helps to reduce the numbers of prisoners in the jail. The sentenced inmate numbers are lower than the pre-sentenced inmate numbers in custody. One reason for this would be that felony inmates are sent to jail where misdemeanor offenders usually are not. The question comes up then – do misdemeanor offenders belong in the community.
He said that page 9 and 10 show that the cases are moving through the judicial system quickly in DeKalb County. That is a good judicial system. He said that about 24% of the current charges are crimes that have been committed against people. Who belongs in jail and who doesn’t is a decision that the County needs to make, said Mr. Goldman.
Pages 15 and 16 show the previous charges during the last four years at the jail and the percentages of female inmates vs. male inmates. Our numbers for males are a little above the national average, said Mr. Goldman. Pages 18 and 19 show the average age of inmates from 2002 vs. 2/12/03 and the marital status of the inmates in the Jail. It states that 78% were single in our jail at that time. This also shows that if the people were married, they would have more ties to the community and would be considered a better risk. This is something to look at too, said Mr. Goldman.
Page 21 shows that the inmates from the City of DeKalb have committed more crimes. Page 23 highlights the sentence distribution in the jail in 2001. Page 24 highlights the inmates with the issues at intake, that is, mental health issues, drug/alcohol issues, suicidal. It also shows 29% have no reported issues at intake.
Page 28 covers the Work Release Program and it shows that there was an average of 6 inmates a month on work release for the year 2001. In 1994 there were 15 per month on work release. It obviously is working and it is suggested that maybe the County should try to expand it in the future.
Page 29 covers the days held in jail for non-sentenced and sentenced inmates. Page 34 covers the general population for the County of DeKalb. On page 36 the report shows that the numbers have crept up slowly over time with regards to the jail ADP (average daily population) and the average on electronic home monitoring. On page 37 it shows the court filings by category over the last ten years (1992-2002). Mr. Goldman felt that there seems to be a little more discretion going on now for court filings than in prior years. This could be because of a new judge, new state’s attorney, new public defender, etc.
Mr. Goldman further stated that although the average daily population was still less than the total capacity for the jail in 2002, the County Jail’s functional capacity was really 80% of the jail’s total beds. Because of this the Jail was consistently exceeding the functional capacity from the year 2000 through 2002. There are two reasons for the numbers of the jail population found on page 39. Mr. Goldman said that based on average daily population, it shows that the Jail is overcrowded. The other reason is that you would want to have people in proper classifications and would want to be able to place them in the appropriate cell areas.
On Page 41 it shows that the projected Average Daily Population was at a 6.6% rate of increase. If this rate continues to increase by the year 2020 the average daily population figure will be up to 271.
On page 43 it explains the projected bed needs based on our historical trends. These projections are based on the projected average daily population (ADP) and the classification and peaking factor to accommodate most peak populations and facilitate housing by classification category. Bed needs are 20 percent more than the ADP. Without this classification and peaking factor, the jail would be overcrowded about half of the time and incoming inmates would be housed in any available cell rather than the appropriate one, said Mr. Goldman.
Mr. Goldman explained that there are generic ways that bed needs may be reduced. If crime is reduced, there is a lower recidivism. We could reduce the number of arrestees coming to the Jail. We could minimize the length of stay of pre-sentenced inmates; speed up court processes for those incarcerated; increase use of pre-trial alternatives; increase use of sentencing alternatives; reduce the length of sentences to the Jail and expedite transfers to the Department of Corrections.
Page 46 highlights the various ways the County currently reduces the bed needs. On page 47 Mr. Goldman addresses the recommended changes that he and Mr. Witke have made to reduce the bed needs. They suggest: to formalize the pre-trial release program; establish a court date reminder system; codify the weekend bond court; expand the electronic home monitoring for pre-sentenced; create a Mental Health & Substance Abuse Jail Diversion Program; expand the Work Release Program; and use graduated sentences regularly which would result in less jail time.
Page 48 shows what would happen with regards to bed needs with or without the changes suggested. Without the changes the bed needs would grow from the average of projected bed needs at 6.6%/Year, from 89 beds to 101 beds in 2003 to 325 beds in 2020. With the changes implemented the average bed needs would increase @ 3.3%/Year, from 98 beds in 2003 to 170 beds in 2020. This decrease in bed needs will only happen if the County is serious about implementing the recommended programs. That means that the bed needs total would decrease from 325 beds to 170 beds in 2020.
Ms. Tobias asked Mr. Goldman how costly is it to implement these changes? Mr. Goldman said that some counties couldn’t afford all of these changes. Some counties have looked at the alternatives to incarceration. Winnebago County did this and found it to be a much more balanced approach.
Mr. Witke then reviewed the Existing Facility Issues and its evaluation. He explained that when you are constantly doubling the amount of inmates and beds in the jail over a certain period of time the wear and tear naturally puts a much bigger toll on the building. He credits Mr. Ken Campbell and his staff in how they have dealt with the building and problems. He further stated that the materials selected were not for the long term and therefore, they deteriorated faster.
Mr. Witke said that the Jail is in relatively good condition but that the mechanical system is rusting out and there are serious problems with ventilation issues. There are code deficiencies and site utilization issues. The staff efficiency and design is not a safe environment. The staff can’t see everything, everywhere (via cameras). There is a shortage of storage space, there is no outside exercise area and there is no natural light. It is seriously lacking in fire safety, which is a considerable liability. Every circuit is overloaded and there is poor ventilation. Code and standards are deficient and that the jail lacks a second fire exit. There is no smoke partition, no air packs and there are structural problems where there is stress being put on columns. He also said that the limited space surrounding the location of the jail creates problems for delivery trucks to have access to the jail. He felt that the building is getting to the point where a significant investment needs to be made to the jail.
Mr. Ken Johnson, DeKalb County Public Defender, asked a question regarding electronic home monitoring. He said that by looking at the Sheriff’s Annual Report about 40% of the population in the jail are from the DeKalb area – you need to live in DeKalb County to be placed on the monitoring program. Most of his clients have a cell phone because it is cheaper than a land based phone. He wanted to know if the Sheriff is looking at using the cell phones for the program too? Lt. Klein said that she is looking at that issue right now.
Chairman Leifheit then opened up the floor for the public to ask questions of the consultants. There were a few that voiced their concern of the jail being in their neighborhood. They stated that the parking in the streets near their homes was a problem. One person asked if the committee would be looking at building a bigger jail and where would the County build it? Mr. Witke said that we don’t know that yet. The committee isn’t that far yet and is only starting to address that issue, along with the consultants, right now. Mr. Witke further explained, as an example, the jail needs an exercise yard. What size would the County need? The County would need to determine what size of inmates would exercise at what time? If you have 90 inmates, you could have two groups go out with 45 inmates at a time or 30 inmates at a time for three sessions.
Mr. Paulsen, Alderman from the City of Sycamore, asked if the County would need to build a minimum-security vs. a maximum-security jail? Mr. Goldman said that the committee would need to look at that when it reviews the expansion question. The County needs to look at some behavioral problems and which inmates are suitable for minimum- security, he said.
Another person asked the consultants if an underground addition to the jail would be considered? Mr. Goldman said that there would be a need for natural light, which would be challenging, but it is possible and that it would be more expensive to build.
The committee then discussed when they would meet again? It was agreed that it would be sometime in May 2003. The committee would be looking at the alternatives and expansion ideas.
ADJOURNMENTMoved by Mr. Haines, seconded by Mr. Feithen, and it was carried unanimously to adjourn.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________________
________________________________
|
|
Home | Return
to top | Subject Index | Return
to minutes |