Livingston Dems Call for Taxpayer Representation on Jail Panel, More Discussion of Need

The panel studying a bigger jail for Livingston County should be expanded to include members of the general public and defense attorneys, as well as being given a greater focus on examining the need for a bigger jail, the chair of the Livingston County Democratic Party says.

"County commissioners seem to have put the cart before the horse by emphasizing finding a way to pay for a bigger jail before proving the need to the voters. They seem to assume everyone agrees that we need a bigger jail without holding any public hearings or airing of the evidence,"  Judy Daubenmier said in a news release Thursday. 

"Commissioners also have claimed that 'all stakeholders' were represented on the panel, but they are leaving out the most important stakeholders of all -- county residents who will pay as much as $14 million, plus interest, for expanding the jail and millions more to operate it for years to come. The panel studying a jail expansion should have at least three citizens who would represent the diversity of our county, both in terms of political viewpoints and life experiences, but who are not county commission members."

Since voter approval may well be required for the jail construction and operating costs, county commissioners should be anxious to include people from outside the courthouse. A proposal put before the voters without citizen involvement will have a harder time winning approval than one in which citizens are involved, especially if the need for a new jail is not fully discussed before the decision is made to build it, Daubenmier said.

"So far, based on a photograph, we know that there are more people being put into the jail than the jail has room for and that the sheriff is struggling to accommodate them. What we don't know is whether all those people really need to be there. It will take more than a photograph to demonstrate that," she said.

Daubenmier noted that the commission resolution setting up the jail committee said the need for the bigger jail had been "well documented" by a feasibility study done by a group of engineers and architects. "Engineers and architects may not be the best people to ask about sentencing alternatives that could avoid spending money on a bigger jail. They make money by building new facilities, not finding ways to avoid them," she said.

"That's why defense attorneys need to be represented on the panel so that we can have a more in-depth discussion of sentencing alternatives than we have heard so far. We have good judges in Livingston County but some are more creative than others in looking for alternatives to locking people up, including use of electronic tethers, drug court, community service, and other options.

"The history of jail and prison expansions is that when new cells are added, judges fill them up. Judges are well aware how many beds are available when they sentence a defendant. We are hearing of cases of people being locked up for driving while their licenses are suspended or failure to pay fines for driving while their licenses are suspended. Can taxpayers afford to pay for that?"

Daubenmier said the willingness of taxpayers to pay for locking up more and more people seems to be falling in Michigan. She pointed to efforts by conservative Republican state Rep. Jim Haveman to reduce Michigan's prison population as a sign of the changing tide of public opinion.

Daubenmier pointed out that funds spent on jail expansion are unavailable for other needs in the county including road repairs and that discussion of a bigger jail is crowding out discussion of other issues.