Facing Up to Threat of Jail Overcrowding : Grand Jury’s Call for New Facilities Is Timely, Prudent

The Orange County Grand Jury has provided a needed public service with its recommendation that two jails be built next to existing jails in Santa Ana and Irvine.

Although two county officials again demonstrated an unfortunate head-in-the-sand reaction to this latest reminder of the problem of jail overcrowding, the grand jury was right to raise the issue. The jurors can only recommend. It is the five supervisors who can start the shovels turning. Lately they have seldom discussed the issue, let alone tried to start building a new jail.

This month’s report by the grand jurors brought a quick response from County Administrative Officer Ernie Schneider, who said that because the county did not have the funds to build or operate a new jail, there was no reason to upset people in Santa Ana and Irvine. Supervisor Gaddi H. Vasquez reminded people that an attempt to get voters to approve a tax for jail construction three years ago failed by a large margin.

However, since that proposed tax was defeated, the question of a new jail has been avoided. The county did reach a welcome tentative agreement last week with the city of Orange to increase the number of beds at the Theo Lacy Branch Jail in Orange by an additional 1,660 beds. County officials also have turned away inmates from other jurisdictions they previously housed temporarily and have encouraged cities to build jails of their own. Both were smart moves.

Yet far more is needed, unless the county is willing to continue releasing tens of thousands of inmates each year before their terms are up. Thousands more continue not to be admitted for lack of space. Sheriff Brad Gates told the supervisors in August that in the past two years he has been forced to give early releases to nearly 55,000 inmates. The cells were needed for inmates considered a higher risk to the community. In many cases, men and women arrested for relatively minor crimes, but who a decade ago would have been jailed to await trial, are given summonses telling them when to appear in court.

Voters may believe they got tough on crime earlier this month by passing the “three strikes” initiative, which will increase prison time for second offenders and put those convicted of three serious or violent crimes behind bars for 25 years to life. As a practical matter, criminals in Orange County must first spend time in the County Jail, awaiting trial or a plea of guilty. Officials predicted that felons are more likely to opt for trial due to “three strikes,” which means they will be in jail longer. Thus other inmates will leave early in still greater numbers.

Although Schneider and Vasquez were right in citing the county’s lack of money for new jails, voters eventually are going to have to decide what they will pay for in order to get tough on crime. The grand jury estimated the construction cost of each 3,000-bed jail, to serve medium- and maximum-security inmates, at $300 million. The voters last time rejected a proposed jail in Gypsum Canyon. Building new jails next to existing ones is one way to go; it would reduce opposition, because it would not involve outraging a new group of residents fearful of a jail. There would still be opposition, but voters must at least understand the alternatives: Build the cells or let inmates out early.

Thomas F. Riley, who is stepping down in January after 20 years as a supervisor, made a fine gesture in offering to vote for a jail siting before his successor takes office, sparing her the political heat. Supervisor Harriett M. Wieder, who is also leaving the board, should consider joining in an act of political resolve.