Oklahoma County residents not supportive of sales tax increase for new jail | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/5299/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA)

Oklahoma County residents not supportive of sales tax increase for new jail | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/5299/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA)

Hopefully as the election nears they'll change their minds, the sales tax route will be much cheaper then having the Federal Government intervene and force the cost on property owners. If we go the sales tax route, everyone will share in the cost, including residents and visitors.

There are only so many revenue methods, and a jail is forthcoming, one way or another.

Given that, having 'none of the above' as a polling option seems downright silly.

Remember that this was a SEPTEMBER poll, as the MAPS3 vote was starting to heat up. I suppose that bonds could be sold - anyone have a take on that option (interest rate, tax exempt possibility, county revenues to service the debt)?

Remember that this was a SEPTEMBER poll, as the MAPS3 vote was starting to heat up.

That's correct, and this poll was also done before the official MAPS 3 proposal was announced.

There are only so many revenue methods, and a jail is forthcoming, one way or another.

Given that, having 'none of the above' as a polling option seems downright silly.

They need to re-run the poll without options 1 or 4. Option 1 is out because that would be in 7 1/2 years and I don't think the federal government is going to give us that long. Option 4 is just plain not an option. I would like to see some new poll results with the only two options we realistically have. As for selling bonds, I haven't heard that discussed. Would be interesting to hear.

Maybe if the proposed jail wasn't 3 times the size of the state penn people would be more supportive of it. Just a thought.

Serious question: Could we construct a substantially SMALLER facility to handle bookings and arraignments only, and then pay another state like Colorado to house these prisoners? I know we'd have to pay the "retail" rate to another state to house them, plus "shipping and handling" of prisoners to/from the facility (sorry - I'm getting a little punchy after Christmas), but would that be cheaper than spending a half-billion dollars on another huge facility?

On the other hand, if a larger facility were to be built, WE could charge the retail rate to house prisoners from other states - thus helping to pay for the facility.

Serious question: Could we construct a substantially SMALLER facility to handle bookings and arraignments only, and then pay another state like Colorado to house these prisoners? I know we'd have to pay the "retail" rate to another state to house them, plus "shipping and handling" of prisoners to/from the facility (sorry - I'm getting a little punchy after Christmas), but would that be cheaper than spending a half-billion dollars on another huge facility?

Once again, stop arresting people over dope, especially marijuana and you'll have less need for more jail space.

Serious question: Could we construct a substantially SMALLER facility to handle bookings and arraignments only, and then pay another state like Colorado to house these prisoners? I know we'd have to pay the "retail" rate to another state to house them, plus "shipping and handling" of prisoners to/from the facility (sorry - I'm getting a little punchy after Christmas), but would that be cheaper than spending a half-billion dollars on another huge facility?

Yes, we could do that too. But here's a better idea: Why don't the dip****s at the county stop holding onto inmates that need to be transported to the state penn or a federal penn in the first place?? Drew Edmondson has even filed a lawsuit against the county for doing this. And then the county says we're in a nightmare situation where we need to build another prison. I don't like to write childish posts, but there are some very childish and pissed off things I would have to say to anyone from the County that tells me we need this prison. It's a joke. The county shouldn't even exist in the first place. They probably don't need to be holding onto to half of the prisoners they're squatting on in the first place.

And then if you want to talk even more generally, how about this: This is a excellent case in point example of how we as a state need to stop locking up every single god damn non violent offended that comes through the system. It's getting ridiculous. We should be spending all of this money on schools, not jails. Bottom line.

I hope the county takes any NO vote on the prison and knows where to shove it when it's through with..

It was originally the "city jail" when it was in the police headquarters across Shartel. The the new facility was originally called the "city-county" jail, and now simply "county." Permit me to fumble through a census-type of question:

What percentage of the inmates are behing held there on municipal, county, state or federal charges, and what percentage are serving out sentences after convictions at the municipal, state and federal levels?

Serious question: Could we construct a substantially SMALLER facility to handle bookings and arraignments only, and then pay another state like Colorado to house these prisoners? I know we'd have to pay the "retail" rate to another state to house them, plus "shipping and handling" of prisoners to/from the facility (sorry - I'm getting a little punchy after Christmas), but would that be cheaper than spending a half-billion dollars on another huge facility?

No, we couldn't.

Guys, this is a county jail. That means, for the most part, the people who are in the jail are those who are awaiting trial. So we can't ship them off to Colorado, unless you want them to be transported back and forth for every court appearance. Some guy gets a DUI and you want to ship him to Colorado before he's even had a trial?

As far as guys who are waiting in county pending transport to a state prison, that's the fault of the Department of Corrections. They're overcrowded, they don't transport prisoners unless forced to. One of the judges here had to issue an order requiring DOC to move guys within 45 days. It's not that the county jail wants to keep them there. They notify DOC, and DOC just sits around not picking them up.

Very few people are actually serving out a sentence in the county. Most of them are awaiting trial.

It was originally the "city jail" when it was in the police headquarters across Shartel. The the new facility was originally called the "city-county" jail, and now simply "county." Permit me to fumble through a census-type of question:

What percentage of the inmates are behing held there on municipal, county, state or federal charges, and what percentage are serving out sentences after convictions at the municipal, state and federal levels?

It was never "City / County" jail, it was built as the Oklahoma County Jail, the City decided that it would be cheaper to pay the county to house it's inmates there instead of building a new City jail.

A few years back a new jail was built in Grady County, but there were problems on not having money to operate it after it was built. Don't recall if that ever got resolved, or if that structure is mostly empty.

A shame if it is empty. Sounds like OK Co. could use the space and paying Grady would help them with that issue.

Oh well.

No, we couldn't.

Guys, this is a county jail. That means, for the most part, the people who are in the jail are those who are awaiting trial. So we can't ship them off to Colorado, unless you want them to be transported back and forth for every court appearance. Some guy gets a DUI and you want to ship him to Colorado before he's even had a trial?

As far as guys who are waiting in county pending transport to a state prison, that's the fault of the Department of Corrections. They're overcrowded, they don't transport prisoners unless forced to. One of the judges here had to issue an order requiring DOC to move guys within 45 days. It's not that the county jail wants to keep them there. They notify DOC, and DOC just sits around not picking them up.

Very few people are actually serving out a sentence in the county. Most of them are awaiting trial.

There are 3,000 people awaiting trial at any given time?

I just wonder how many citizens are arrested on a daily basis for unpaid traffic fines and small amounts of pot/weed/maryjane.

There really should be another avenue for these types of offenses. I bet if you took away all these people there wouldn't be a need for nearly as large of a jail. Maybe the city/county/state could seize their drivers license till a fine was paid? There has to be another type of punishment besides putting them in the clink and taxing the citizens.

Well the state with the lowest dept of corrections budget, Minnesota, also doesn't do jail sentences, period, for nonviolent offenders.. so there you have it. MN also has one of the nation's lowest crime rates. And for the most part, MN is definitely the example to follow when it comes to corrections.

MN also elected a pro wrestler and a snot-nosed, hateful, disrespectful comedian to high political office. I'm not sure their example is one to follow.

Governor Jesse Jackson and Senator Al Franken..lol

Would you rather have that, or Ernest Istook, Brad Henry, and James Mountain Inhofe? At least MN's are interesting. OK's bad politicians are just corrupt and lame.

The only 'cool' politician we really have is Coburn..and Mayor Mick of course.

Jesse Ventura - not Jesse Jackson (smile). Personally, I'd rather have who we have in comparison to Al Franken who totally disrespected Sen. Lieberman the other day. It was rude, arrogent and against all protocal of the Senate to do that. Typical ***-hole behavior of someone like Franken.

I do Not want a tax increase. However I'd rather pay more in taxes if it means keeping people in jail and off the streets. Legalize the weed, that would help also.

What?? I was told my post do not have to be sensored after the first 2 post. If this website sensors post forget it!

Well the state with the lowest dept of corrections budget, Minnesota, also doesn't do jail sentences, period, for nonviolent offenders.. so there you have it. MN also has one of the nation's lowest crime rates. And for the most part, MN is definitely the example to follow when it comes to corrections.

I doubt that many Oklahomans could get elected to state office advocating changing laws that would work to put fewer Oklahomans in prison, rather than more.

Maybe one good side effect to having a smaller state budget to work with for 2010 is that legislators will will pass fewer laws that would work to put more people in prison.

If we want a more free state, a less imprisoned one, then make it a goal to do away with two laws before making a new one.

MN also elected a pro wrestler and a snot-nosed, hateful, disrespectful comedian to high political office. I'm not sure their example is one to follow.

Bwahaha! Love Al Franken! And Lieberman is a putz! Good for Al!

I doubt that many Oklahomans could get elected to state office advocating changing laws that would work to put fewer Oklahomans in prison, rather than more.

I think we might be surprised how many Oklahomans support less jail time for non-violent offenders. It just doesn't make any sense.

I think we might be surprised how many Oklahomans support less jail time for non-violent offenders. It just doesn't make any sense.

FWIW, drug courts have grown dramatically since first kicking off. Sole purpose is to try to rehab folks instead of warehouse them, although the big stick remains while the carrot dangles.

Other changes have also been kicked in over the years, for youth and adult alike.

At the same time, more serious crimes have received more serious time requirements, e.g., 85% rule before parole eligibility.

There's no net surplus in beds, and we, most probably, still lock up way too many folks we're just ticked at instead of keeping the limited space for those we are afraid of.

Happens.

Texas has been HUGE with drug courts and "DIVERT" courts. Great program for them.

FWIW, drug courts have grown dramatically since first kicking off. Sole purpose is to try to rehab folks instead of warehouse them, although the big stick remains while the carrot dangles.



But people who fail to pass drug courts are usually actual drug addicts and need real rehab and not simply what drug courts typically offer, which is anti drug propaganda to read and a series of drug tests. Of course, though, there's no shortage of Oklahomans who pretty strongly feel that drug addicts should be punished thru time in prison. After all, if you do the crime, you gotta do the time. And considering that one can without a doubt do up to life in prison for messing with drugs, it must be one of the most serious crimes you can possibly commit against society in Oklahoma.

But people who fail to pass drug courts are usually actual drug addicts and need real rehab and not simply what drug courts typically offer, which is anti drug propaganda to read and a series of drug tests. Of course, though, there's no shortage of Oklahomans who pretty strongly feel that drug addicts should be punished thru time in prison. After all, if you do the crime, you gotta do the time. And considering that one can without a doubt do up to life in prison for messing with drugs, it must be one of the most serious crimes you can possibly commit against society in Oklahoma.

Bunty, it wasn't all that long ago there wasn't a single drug court in the state.
The progress may not be to your liking, but surely you can recognize that progress exists.

Will OK ever be a oh pat 'em on the tush, sing kum by yah and suggest they get themselves a script to stay outta trouble? Nope. But in a land where even a single drug court is still considered a step more than controversial, the growth of the courts, and the number of folks diverted, is fairly remarkable.

Sure, there is room for further progress. There's also room to see existing progress wiped out in short order. Fortunately, the hard core punishment folks pretty much give the drug courts a pass. If they dinna, they'd be gone in one election cycle, two tops.

Coming back to track, I wonder how a 18 month 2.5 cent temp sales tax, for land and construction costs, together with a small prop tax increase, to cover ongoing operations of a larger facility, would play in the county.

I think not looking at sales tax for some aspect of the need is nutso, since you can collect so much from outside the OKC metro. Of course, some fot hat you'll collect anyhows on a county wide tax, but still, you get the passer throughs, regular visitors like me, commuters, etc.

I just wonder how many citizens are arrested on a daily basis for unpaid traffic fines and small amounts of pot/weed/maryjane.

There really should be another avenue for these types of offenses. I bet if you took away all these people there wouldn't be a need for nearly as large of a jail. Maybe the city/county/state could seize their drivers license till a fine was paid? There has to be another type of punishment besides putting them in the clink and taxing the citizens.

I feel that the most sensible solution would be to 1) legalize marijuana (and possibly other 'soft' drugs), and 2) refocus efforts towards "hard" drug offenders on rehabilitation rather than punishment, and 3) focus on catching the people selling/distributing the "hard" drugs.

However, this is Oklahoma so it'll be practically the last place you ever see such reforms (especially #1). I think a good compromise for #1 (but not a complete solution) would be to decriminalize marijuana possession...example would be Nebraska's marijuana laws (http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=4549), where possession of ≤1oz of marijuana is a civil citation with a $300 fine. Sadly, so many people are misguided in how they see the problem of drug abuse/drug-related crime (and potential solutions), and politicians adopt a stance of being "TOUGH ON DRUGS" to get votes from such individuals.

Several years ago in the Oklahoma Legislature they tried to decriminalize marijunana, but it got voted down.

What were they smoking?

Bwahaha! Love Al Franken! And Lieberman is a putz! Good for Al!

And exactly how are the actions of Sen. Franken towards Sen. Lieberman respectful to the institute of the US Senate? Its not an issue of whether you like one or the other or not. Its keeping with the traditions of respect and decorum fitting the procedings of the US Senate. Its almost as bad as Sen. Wilson's shouting of "You lie!" at Pres. Obama during the State of the Union address. So far, its turning out that Sen. Wilson may be right, however.

There are 3,000 people awaiting trial at any given time?

Probably more than that. Those are just the ones who couldn't make bond.

Edit:

I actually happen to know quite a bit about the drug court in Oklahoma County, if anyone is curious. I have my own opinions on it. But overall I'll just say that it's disingenuous to try and make a distinction between "users" and "dealers". If you're into drugs heavily enough to get arrested for possession, you're probably dealing a little bit too. I mean, hardcore addicts aren't renowned for their ability to get and keep a job, and drugs are expensive.

I just find that really hard to believe. It blows my mind if we have anywhere near 3,000 people awaiting trial at any given time.

There are 700,000 people in Oklahoma County -- 3,000 people awaiting trial, means that at ANY given moment you have .05% of the population on trial. How long does their stay in the county lockup last, a month, or two? Probably a month but I'll be really generous and say two, so that means over the course of a whole year, you have 3% of the entire population of this county awaiting trial??

So take 100 of your friends. 3 of them are staying in the county lockup awaiting trial for something they did during the course of ONE year, on average. I have never, in my life, known anyone who was in the Oklahoma County Jail.

I just find that really hard to believe. It blows my mind if we have anywhere near 3,000 people awaiting trial at any given time.

There are 700,000 people in Oklahoma County -- 3,000 people awaiting trial, means that at ANY given moment you have .05% of the population on trial. How long does their stay in the county lockup last, a month, or two? Probably a month but I'll be really generous and say two, so that means over the course of a whole year, you have 3% of the entire population of this county awaiting trial??

So take 100 of your friends. 3 of them are staying in the county lockup awaiting trial for something they did during the course of ONE year, on average. I have never, in my life, known anyone who was in the Oklahoma County Jail.

Spartan, you're lucky to have such a circle of friends, aquaintances, and relatives. There is a whole other life out there that you're not exposed to, however. I know a young man who has been in the county jail a number of times. It seems in talking to him that everyone he knows or has ever known is either in the county jail, has just gotten out, or is afraid because of some violation that they will be going back. Many people would be suprised to hear that it's only 3 percent.

FWIW Spartan, for the folks who canna make a bond, two months doesn't accurately address the time frame they will await a final determination of their charges unless they are popping a plea as fast as humanly possible, and at times, not eve then. The wheels of justice have no turbo charger on the powerplant.

Oh I forgot about bonds. So the reality is that most people who do post bond to get the heck out of there don't even stay there longer than a day or two..

Oh I forgot about bonds. So the reality is that most people who do post bond to get the heck out of there don't even stay there longer than a day or two..

Those who can make bond, including those who qualify for own recognizance bonds, do have fairly short stays, some having only a brief walk through for pics and prints. The rest, it's all over the place. Of course, some folks can't make a bond until funds have been gathered amongst the fam, or friends, or .... well, let's leave it until other forms of creative financing are in place. These bonds can take days, weeks, months to occur.

There were nearly 7000 felony cases filed in Oklahoma County in 2009. There were nearly 5000 misdemeanors.

It traditionally takes about a year for a case to get to trial. Let's say you are arrested, oh, tomorrow. That's January 5th. You won't get arraigned until about 10 days have passed. So that's January 15th. You'll get a court date for January 21st, the first Thursday after your arraignment. This is a conference docket. It's when your attorney and the DA try to work out a deal. Now, since your first court date is only ~6 days after your arraignment, the chances are that the DA hasn't really had much of a chance to review your file. So the DA might not have any sort of plea bargain deal to offer you at that point. If you want to try to negotiate at all, your case will probably be continued for about a month. So this puts you towards the end of February. Now, if you want to cut a deal, you're looking at having sat in the county jail for about two months. Some of the deals offered by the DA may include things like spending six months to a year in the county jail and then some time on probation (instead of going to prison).

But let's say you can't work something out with the DA. The DA wants you to do prison time, and you want probation, so you aren't going to be able to reach a compromise. So now it's late February. You ask the court for a preliminary hearing. You've got a right to one if you're charged with a felony. So the judge will give you a hearing date, probably in about a month. So late March rolls around and you're ready for a hearing. Maybe a quarter of the time (actually probably two thirds of the time in domestic abuse cases), something goes wrong and the DA can't get their witnesses there on the date of the hearing. So he'll ask the judge to continue the hearing so that he can try and find his witnesses. The judge will grant it, and you'll sit in jail another month. So now it's late April. You have a hearing, and the judge decides there's enough evidence to bind you over for trial. So you get a new court date (for pretrial conference) in front of a different judge. This one will be about a month and a half out. So now we're looking at early June. This is the earliest date when you can then ask for a trial. In the meantime, your attorney is trying to work things out with the DA. So let's say the DA agrees you should be reviewed for some type of program, maybe Drug Court or Community Sentencing. It normally takes about a month for those programs to make a determination on eligibility. Or maybe he doesn't, and you say "screw you, I'm going to trial". So it's early June, and you ask the judge for a trial date. If you're asking for a trial in June, the earliest date they'll have available is probably October or so. So this is your first trial date. Chances are, the DA or your attorney will be in trial on some other case (DAs normally have 5 or 6 different cases set for trial on any given trial week), or the judge you are in front of will have another case that goes. After all, does he want to try your bogus check case, or a murder? So the case will probably get continued again, putting you sometime later. I had a case last October that got continued because the DA was unprepared, we're now set in late January.

Hey look, you've now been there over a year. And the situation I described is perfectly normal. Traditionally, there may be another continuance or two scattered in there as your attorney attempts to work out some other type of deal. Maybe he's trying to get medical records to show that you're crazy and so should be given treatment. Or maybe you are crazy, and he files for a competency evaluation, thus staying your case. Or perhaps you've got a codefendant on the case, and the judge wants to make sure you keep the cases together.

Yes, people spend a LOT longer than a month or two in the county jail.

OK cool. Thanks for the insight, I'll be the first to admit I don't know a whole lot about how it works.

So if you're a minor drug offender and we had more drug court programs set up or ways to handle it outside of the penal system, would that completely cut out the visits to the county jail? Or if we had a special drug court system set up for all drug offenders would they have to be processed through the county jail first?

They'd have to go through county jail first. The Oklahoma Drug Court statute sets up a "prison diversion" system. Basically the only way they could get funding for the drug court was if it saved money. Putting someone in drug court is cheaper than putting them in prison (Oklahoma prison incarceration costs between $17,000 and $20,000 a year, per person). So, as part of the statutory requirement, the only people eligible for drug courts are those who are not eligible for any other form of probation. To do drug court, your only other alternative has to be prison. This generally means the people who do drug court are those who already have two or more felony convictions (thus making them ineligible for probation, and also contributing to Oklahoma's roughly 53% drug court failure rate, as by the time people get there, they have severe drug problems).

Normally, the drug court process starts the way I outlined above. Someone is arrested, arraigned, they go to their first conference, and at that point the attorney requests drug court (although many times you don't look to do drug court until sometime later in the process). It takes at least a month to get someone in drug court. During that time they sit in jail. And if someone has a case in another county, you've also got to coordinate with that county to make sure that you don't put your guy in drug court, only to have that county send them to prison (in which case, they ain't doing your drug court).

Are there any other programs that are 47% effective with people who have 2 felonies or more and severe drug problems?

I read somewhere that approximately 85% of the "County Jail Residents" are repeat offenders, I think that's part of the problem. If they don't learn the first time, why should we be lenient ?

Wanna volunteer for the firing squad?

Are there any other programs that are 47% effective with people who have 2 felonies or more and severe drug problems?

Probably not. Unfortunately, drug courts in Oklahoma only get people when they're almost at the point of no return. It would probably be more effective if we could implement a program for first time offenders. It's like the difference between teaching a guy in his 40s to read and teaching a 5 year old. It's easier for the 5 year old.


I read somewhere that approximately 85% of the "County Jail Residents" are repeat offenders, I think that's part of the problem. If they don't learn the first time, why should we be lenient ?

Because you don't want to pay $20,000 a year to keep someone locked up if they're not really dangerous? Especially when it's shown that prison isn't an effective deterrent. You're basically paying $20,000 dollars a year for something that doesn't work.

Probably not. Unfortunately, drug courts in Oklahoma only get people when they're almost at the point of no return. It would probably be more effective if we could implement a program for first time offenders. It's like the difference between teaching a guy in his 40s to read and teaching a 5 year old. It's easier for the 5 year old.



Because you don't want to pay $20,000 a year to keep someone locked up if they're not really dangerous? Especially when it's shown that prison isn't an effective deterrent. You're basically paying $20,000 dollars a year for something that doesn't work.

Your probably still paying for them even if they aren't locked up, if they won't or don't work, they more than likely receive public assistance.

Because you don't want to pay $20,000 a year to keep someone locked up if they're not really dangerous? Especially when it's shown that prison isn't an effective deterrent. You're basically paying $20,000 dollars a year for something that doesn't work.

But it undeniably works to keep politicians in office who fear advocating repealing laws that place non dangerous offenders in office would keep them voted out come reelection time. That's about all unjust and insane anti drug laws are good for--to keep elected politicians in office.

[/COLOR]

Your probably still paying for them even if they aren't locked up, if they won't or don't work, they more than likely receive public assistance.

Keep them locked up forever, you'll guarantee they're on public assistance.

Well, I would imagine it gives much of the public a lot of satisfaction to get back at people they don't like by putting them away in prison while being out of sight and out of mind.