For a lawman, Rep. Tony Cornish (who serves as Lake Crystal's chief of police when not hanging with the Draz and the Gruenator in the House Public Safety committee) has Minnesota sheriffs ready to read the riot act.
In Inmate legislation worries sheriff, the Winona Daily News reports:
A recent bill that would require some prison inmates to serve time in county jails has raised concern among some county sheriffs. Rep. Tony Cornish, R-Good Thunder, would like to see all state inmates sentenced to serve 60 days or less in prison spend the time in county jails. . . .
"It's not good for us," Winona County Sheriff Dave Brand said. "It would increase our spending."
The bill would require counties and, consequently, taxpayers, to cover the slightly more than $100 a day per inmate cost that's currently footed by the state. And that amount would likely increase for counties with overcrowded jails already struggling to find enough space for inmates, such as Winona County, Brand said. Jails at full capacity must pay other counties to house additional inmates.
As of Friday, 11 of Winona's inmates were being held in Wabasha County's jail, according to daily booking records.
"We don't have any room for them here," Brand said. . . .
The Mankato Free Press article, Sheriffs chafe at shift;Counties would jail some now in state prisons, echoes the concerns of Winona County's sheriff:
On one issue, Lake Crystal Police Chief and state lawmaker Tony Cornish has produced unanimity among the sheriffs across Minnesota’s 87 counties.
“Myself and the other 86 sheriffs in the state aren’t too happy with the proposal Rep. Cornish is pushing,” said Nicollet County Sheriff Dave Lange.
Cornish acknowledges the sheriffs' concerns, attributes the cuts to the state's dire financial situation, but nonetheless wants the proposed change to persist through better times:
. . .steep cuts in many programs make them only one of many sources of grumbling. The only exception is the judicial system, which budget committees worked to protect from cuts.
“Everybody else is pretty much, ‘ The sky is falling,’” he said.
Cornish isn’t backing down on the proposal to move short-term inmates from the state Department of Corrections to county jails. In fact, he thinks the change should continue even after the state’s budget woes lessen.
“After studying it, it really probably should be looked at as a permanent fix,” he said.
Sheriff Lange disagrees:
Lange agrees that it probably doesn’t make sense to send a convict to prison for a two-week sentence or even for a month. But for the state to refuse to take a prisoner with a two-month sentence — or the six month minimum that was in place for several years last decade when state prisons were full — is a blatant attempt to make county taxpayers cover the cost of a state obligation, he said.
The shift might be more expensive as well:
That’s because convicts sentenced to state prison are typically difficult inmates more likely to spark disciplinary actions and related appeals, more apt to assault others in the jail, and more likely to harm jailers and drive up workers compensation costs.
State prisons are better equipped to deal with those types of inmates,[executive director of the Minnesota Sheriffs Association Jim] Franklin said.
Earlier, the New Ulm Journal looked at more specific scenarios in Sheriffs object to proposal from Cornish:
Brown County Sheriff Rich Hoffmann and Brown County Jail Administrator Mike Mathiowetz said that the unsupported cost of the additional prisoners would strain county budgets and push the expense onto the taxpayers.
"[The state] is trying to balance its budget by passing off the cost," said Hoffmann "It's the county that will eat the additional cost."
Mathiowetz said the average cost of housing a short-term prisoner is $100 per day.
He said that, more importantly, the county would be on the hook for any medical expenses that a prisoner incurs during his or her stay.
He detailed one female prisoner with a persistent medical problem that racked up $24,000 in hospital expenses over two weeks. He explained that the prisoner wasn't a short-term offender, but she had been housed in Brown County Jail for a very short period. He said that despite the prisoner's short stay, Brown County had to cover the cost.
He also gave an example of associated costs that come with the medical care of prisoners. He explained that a male prison became seriously ill while in Brown County Jail and had to be transported to a metro hospital for treatment. He said that the prisoner luckily had most of his medical expense covered by disability insurance. However, he explained that the prisoner remained at the hospital long enough that Brown County had to hire a private company to guard him. He said the expense for the guards alone was $10,000.
And a Brown County deputy mentions that the policy Cornish recommends had been abandoned in the past:
Brown County Chief Deputy Jason Seidl said that the previous version of this bill was repealed because of constant petitions and complaints from Minnesota sheriffs. He said they largely challenged the insufficient funding, which is completely absent in this law.
"Essentially, this is an unfunded mandate," said Seidl.
Interesting times.
Bluestem responds to the comment below: This comment is typical of right-wing "arguments" that drawn discussions away from the actual matter at hand.
Let's unpack the logical fallacies so readers can see how it's done.
First, this commenter draws a false equivalence between PAID contracts that the federal government draws up with county jails and a proposal for counties to house state prisoners at the counties' expense.
If the commenter were arguing logically, he would recommend that the state contract with and pay counties for short-term prisoners. He does not.
Next, the commenter asserts that we have too many counties and thus duplication at the local level. Thus, he asserts, this should cause us to consolidate county governments.
This is an argument in favor of conducting government only at the state level, and thus against Cornish's proposal. In short, abolish the county jails, and have one system. Presumably, that means transferring all corrections to the state prison system.
This isn't what Cornish's proposal does. Once more and very very slowly, it sends criminals who violate conditions of their release who have a short time to serve to county jails and doesn't pay the county any costs.
Both tactics are distractions from talking about the merit or lack thereof in Cornish's proposal.
Those commenting here should stay on topic.
Original comment:
I believe now counties already house federal prisoners on contract either waiting for trial or sentencing. I have friends that work in both state and county jails and are overcrowded and "juggle" prisoners on a daily basis to get the maximum number of prisoners because they get a daily amount for each they house that day. Maybe it is time to look at combining counties or reducing the layers of government. Does the state still need 87 seperate counties administrating, purchasing, policing, constructing, lobbying, etc ?? Time to look at the overall system instead of putting band-aids on the sinking ships.
Posted by: mnfishrman | Apr 18, 2011 at 01:30 PM