Jail still a thorn in County Council's side

A slowdown in arrests has eased overcrowding problems at the Spartanburg County jail, but officials expect the relief to be short-lived. Meanwhile, progress on planning and constructing a new jail has stalled, mostly because of an estimated $16.8 million price tag.

While county officials mull over ways of cutting costs, the problems of the overcrowded and aging jail continue to grow. The number of inmates in county custody dropped to 113 this month, the lowest point in more than two years, but there is no reason to believe the jail population will remain low, said Jail Director Larry Powers.

On March 25, a record 225 people were in county custody, a population nearly three times the 82-inmate maximum limit set by state Department of Corrections officials for the county jail. That number of inmates filled both the county and city jails beyond capacity. The city jail handles the overflow of inmates from the county jail under a contract between the city and county governments. Over the past year, that contract cost the county more than $250,000.

Blake E. Taylor Jr., director of internal affairs, audits and inspections for the state Department of Corrections, said the Spartanburg County jail has been in violation of standards for maximum capacity since the limits were set in 1980. However, the department has been lenient in enforcing the regulations because of a "good faith effort" by the county to address the problem, including hiring a consultant and planning for a new jail, he said. The problems at the county jail have been minimized by good management, but state officials expect to see continued progress or they will take action against the county, Taylor said. "We hope some decisions will have been made by late fall, early winter, when we make our annual inspection. We'd like to see contracts in place or, at least, a schedule of when things are expected to get done," he said.

Throughout January, February and March the inmate population in the county jail was up drastically, Powers reported. Special arrangements between court and jail officials helped keep the inmate numbers down by decreasing the time between arrest and bond hearings. But the procedural changes could not keep pace with the rate of new admissions to the jail, he said. Admissions increased from an average of 51 per day in July 1988 to 57 per day in March - an additional 200 inmates per month passing through the jail.

Powers said he could not explain the recent drop in arrests. "I don't know if it's a change in the philosophy of law enforcement. There is really no reason I can give for it," he said. But the arrest rate is not likely to remain down, he said. Crime rates traditionally increase as temperatures rise. The hot, summer weather could cause problems in the jail, which has no air conditioning, he said. However, new fans, providing ice water and more frequent use of the outside recreation yard should help keep inmate tempers and accompanying problems down, Powers said. "With the heat and the overcrowding, it doesn't take much to ignite the situation," County Administrator Ken Westmoreland said.

The county's exposure to inmate lawsuits also increases with the county's jail population, Westmoreland said, adding the longer the delay in addressing the problems, the more serious the problems become. "I think we're at the point where a decision needs to be made," he said.

The consultants and a local advisory committee have made their recommendations. Also, financial advisors have looked into the county's ability to borrow money to build the jail, he said. Ongoing debate on the county budget has distracted the attention of the County Council, but Westmoreland said he thinks the council will soon address hiring an architect for the work.

The 1989-90 budget proposal includes $750,000 for initial bond payments to cover architect fees and acquiring property for the jail. Westmoreland said the preliminary cost estimates have slowed progress on the jail, including decisions on a location and size.

Consultants have recommended building a jail to hold more than 600 inmates at an undetermined 25-acre site outside the city of Spartanburg. They estimate the cost at between $16.8 million and $19 million. Council members have indicated they want to reduce the cost before authorizing the project. But Westmoreland said, "We have to get an architect on board to get those costs down.

The $16 million is a pre-architectural estimate with worst case scenarios built in. We need an architect to start working with the plans to see what cost saving measures can be designed into the project." Westmoreland acknowledged that building a $16 million jail is not publicly popular, but the county may have no alternative. "We can do some things on a temporary basis, but I'm not sure they would be cost effective. The demand for incarceration facilities will increase. To spend $1 million on a temporary facility will not be cost effective in the long run," Westmoreland said.

The problem is not unique to Spartanburg. Greenville County is considering a proposal to build a $34 million jail to replace its jail, he said. If approved, a new county jail is expected to take about three years to build.