Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.
Scott Elliott is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He writes about education, city and suburban issues, politics, business, workforce and consumer issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2010 > July > 31 > Entry
Editorial: Ohio can’t keep locking everyone up
Politicians and judges love to talk about locking up criminals and throwing away the key. There’s just one problem: When the offenses are minor, the cost for all that prison time adds up fast. There has to be a better way.
Other states are showing that there are other options. Minor criminals are better dealt with outside of prison as long as they are well supervised. For Ohio, supervision is the missing link.
A study by the Council of State Governments Justice Center released Monday, July 26, showed Ohio’s uncoordinated probation and supervision processes contribute to a revolving door for minor offenders who constantly return for short stints in lockup.
Those short sentences, usually less than a year, cost the state dearly. Incarcerating a single inmate for a year in Ohio runs more than $25,000 — a figure that exceeds other states.
The pattern also keeps the state’s prisons full. Ohio houses more prisoners than the three closest states by population — Michigan, Illinois and Pennsylvania — with more than 50,000 inmates.
States like California and Texas are taking action to instead manage minor offenders through enhanced probation. The programs have shown promise both for reducing incarceration costs and for helping the offenders break the cycle of repeatedly returning to jail.
A key is coordination. Ohio has a patchwork system of probation in which different jurisdictions use different standards, follow different procedures and infrequently connect even when managing the same offender who has committed crimes in different counties.
That needs to change. As the report states, Ohio should redesign its system so that it works statewide and follows consistent standards.
Those who have committed nonviolent property crimes and thefts can benefit from better supervision. For example, Ohio can look to drug and mental-health courts in the Dayton area. In both cases, offenders who have drug or mental-health issues are referred to court on days when experts in treatment, diversion and rehabilitation are on hand. They link the offenders with services while judges keep close tabs on their progress.
Those who can’t stick with a probation plan end up in jail. But court officials delight in the success stories of many who have gotten their lives together.
Not every low-level offender needs intense supervision. Statewide standards for assessing them and placing them under the right level of monitoring (with the constant threat of being locked up as leverage) would create a better chance of keeping them out of the prison revolving door.
Ohio’s 32 prisons are 30 percent over capacity. Between 1980 and 2000, Ohio was fourth in the nation for prison construction, tripling the number of facilities. The state found it could not build its way out of its criminal-justice problems.
With a multibillion dollar state budget crisis looming, Ohio has to look for better options. It can’t afford to jail people who can be punished in a cheaper way.
Permalink | Comments (18) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Law Enforcement and Public Safety, Scott Elliott
Comments
By Max
July 31, 2010 7:36 AM | Link to this
It it ironic the cost of incarcerating minor offenders far exceeds the cost of the offense which leads one to conclude ‘you can’t put a price on justice.’ Well, of course a reasonable penalty can be administered at the court level which means county or municipal jurisdictions. One additional issue Scott sidestepped in the interest of keeping on topic is there often is a ‘waiting list’ at some facilities which guides judges’ decisions in sentencing. This, in effect, burdens further a probation system already in need of restructuring. I’m not one to criticize without offering some positive alternative and it may be with all the vacant industrial facilities in our area that these could somehow be used as low security, work facilities for minor offenders. ‘Some training, a few bucks, and time served may prove to be more effective than just incarceration followed by probation.
By Max
July 31, 2010 8:15 AM | Link to this
By the way, Scott, ‘problems’ are political orphans which both parties distance themselves from by filing for custody through their ‘solutions’ as if meeting them for the first time. We don’t hear much of an ‘ouch’ from the Attorney General or the General Assemby about the SC’s decision on parts of the Adam Walsh Law do we? Both gobbled up that Federal treat with Federal funds attached if they fast tracked the AWL. I’d argue we have some bad laws on the books which, along with alternative sentencing, should be re-examined by the General Assembly. Getting tough doesn’t mean we have to get stupid.
By Max
July 31, 2010 9:04 AM | Link to this
Brack, I hope you’e not serious in a 1936 sort of way…..Thankfully, that is not reflective of this nation’s or community’s views today.
By Rick
July 31, 2010 11:19 AM | Link to this
Let’s focus on the victims of those “minor” offenders instead. Here is a typical Dayton example: a homeowner or landlord lets their property deteriorate, refuses to fix the problem, the yard is a mess, the paint is peeling, the residents blast loud music at all hours. The housing inspector takes forever to ticket the place, but finally gets the job done. The homeowner/landlord pays fines, but nothing improve. At this point this “minor” offender has become a HUGE problem for the neighbors. Incarceration is exactly the right answer. There are lots of other scenarios that I could come up with. If we don’t incarcerate some of these people, then the citizens will be force to take matters into their own hands. Of course, the system would come down like a ton of bricks on these citizens.
By Stacy
July 31, 2010 11:43 AM | Link to this
Prison? Ohio (and many other states) no longer stop with prison. Take individuals who have committed minor sex offenses, (an adult female guard who has consenting sex with an adult inmate). Because the inmate can’t “legally consent,” the female guard ends up as a Tier 3 (predator) registered sex offender, and some deputy has to drive out to her house AT LEAST 4 times a year, the sheriff’s office has to pay for an mail out 1,000s of postcards every 3 months - for the rest of her life. Now, take this and multiply it by 27,000 registered sex offenders in Ohio and there is little doubt why sheriff’s offices are forced to lay off deputies. I don’t want to pay taxes to track, harass, and register “peeking toms” who committed a crime 20 years ago - I want my money spent hunting down and locking up TODAY’s criminals those with a severe drug problem, repeated drunk drivers, etc.
By Max
July 31, 2010 12:14 PM | Link to this
I’m not certain if the prospect of incarceration is a deterrent or punishment proportionate to minor offenses. Rick, confiscation of property under current - or tweaking - zoning ordinances alleviates the the problem plus benefits the community rather placing an additional burden jail presents. Stacy, the problem you address is, agreed, a case of overreaction by our legislature which panders to public fears. A murder or manslaughter sentence, when served (often less than even the statutory sexual offense cases), is done and over with no notifications - mail or web-based - owed to the community. RE: Drunk driving. This is a far more serious offense than the courts have treated it. Entire families can be killed or maimed by this disregard for responsible drinking. The second offense should be a state and national PERMANENT REVOCATION of operators license.
By Max
July 31, 2010 12:36 PM | Link to this
A Postscript: I lived in Florida when Adam Walsh was abducted and murdered. It was a awful event for the Walsh family and Florida residents. So was the capture and trial of Ted Bundy. However, I firmly believe John Walsh has severely overstepped the generally accepted boudaries of grief and vengence to the point of self-centered celebrity status resulting in the harm of minor children such as the current statutory penalites under the AWL for peer-to-peer sex ‘crimes’ based mostly on biology, not criminal activity. To make every American a ‘vigilante’ or to endanger them to retalliation through ‘snitch’ calls via Walsh’s American Most Wanted is what Germany and Russia promoted in their totalitarian years. I think we need fewer appeals that ‘police need our help’ and free/fund law enforcement to do their jobs.
By Erudite
July 31, 2010 6:58 PM | Link to this
Blah-blah-blah. Blah, blah blah blah. Blah blah? Blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah…..Max has added more blah blah blah, blah…to the blah blah blah pertinant to the more important point of blah blah blah. So…in conclusion…Max sez blah blah blah…that’s why he’s in charge…a real HMFIC!!!!!
By Crazy Logic
July 31, 2010 7:31 PM | Link to this
Under this logic, the DDN would surely support doing away with traffic speed enforcement and fines because it is just too expensive to administer. The patrolman, the car, the gas, the maintenance, etc. Lets just remove the consequence of speeding and hope people stop doing it. Just like disciplining a small child, the only thing they understand is that for certain actions there are consequences. Take away a fine for speeding, everyone does it. Same with petty criminals who commit ‘minor’ offenses. Take away any and all meaningful consequence and they just keep doing it. As much as I hate paying more taxes, one thing I would support is paying more to lock people up — making sure there are consequences for their law breaking actions. Once someone gets locked up for a year for theft, instead of 90 days probation, they might think twice before doing it again.
By Max
August 1, 2010 3:01 AM | Link to this
Erudite, how ‘erudite.’ You prove the axiom 4 pennies make more noise in the pocket than a single dime…Apparently you have nothing to contribute beyond self refuting ‘name.’ Good for you. I hope the same depth and substance works well in your personal and professional life.
By Max
August 1, 2010 3:10 AM | Link to this
Crazy Logic, I agree with your concept and it follows the conventional concept today. The problem is the consequences - let’s say petty theft/shoplifting - are not sufficient to discourage a repeat offense. We still pay the jail bill. I think an alternative is to punish those offenders outside incarceration; put them to work.
By grumpy
August 1, 2010 10:15 AM | Link to this
I agree it’s time to stop locking up criminals. Any criminal convicted of a violent crime should instead be summarily executed. This would save the taxpayers a fortune, eliminate any chance at recidivism and serve as a strong deterrent to those in society contemplating violence to solve their issues.
By fortressdayton
August 1, 2010 11:23 AM | Link to this
As long as incarcerating individuals is treated as a money-making business, we will continue to pay for unnecessary incarceration. When there is money coming in (from ICE or other counties, for example) the counties fill their jails. When the money dries up, they release. Jaywalkers, people driving under suspension and pot smokers don’t belong in jail. Jails are one of the few growth business in the nation. Look up Bob Barker’s prison supply business and look up Wackenhut’s stock. If you want a good retirement, invest in these businesses. An investment in crime is an investment in America!
By JAG
August 2, 2010 7:03 PM | Link to this
It is unfortunate that Ohio does not have an abundance of citizens who think along the lines of Stacy’s thoughts. ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ By Stacy July 31, 2010 11:43 AM Prison? Ohio (and many other states) no longer stop with prison. I don’t want to pay taxes to track, harass, and register “peeking toms” who committed a crime 20 years ago - I want my money spent hunting down and locking up TODAY’s criminals those with a severe drug problem, repeated drunk drivers, etc.
By JAG
August 2, 2010 7:05 PM | Link to this
It is unfortunate that Ohio does not have an abundance of citizens who think along the lines of Stacy’s thoughts. ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ By Stacy July 31, 2010 11:43 AM Prison? Ohio (and many other states) no longer stop with prison. I don’t want to pay taxes to track, harass, and register “peeking toms” who committed a crime 20 years ago - I want my money spent hunting down and locking up TODAY’s criminals those with a severe drug problem, repeated drunk drivers, etc.
By Stephen Lahanas
August 3, 2010 12:12 PM | Link to this
Both prisons and detention of illegal immigrants is a for profit business now in America. The largest company providing these services is Wackenhut. I’m sure they’d be happy to incarcerate millions more people for minor nonvoilent offfenses. The question is whether we will continue to let them push for laws and penalties that turn to profits - it is a frightening conflict of interest.
By Amazed
August 3, 2010 5:07 PM | Link to this
Violent offenders must be held to a higher standard. After their third conviction a mandantory life sentence should be imposed without the possibility of parole. Death sentences should be carried out within 3 yrs of incarceration. Minor offenses should include work programs for the public good. However, after three minor offenses then it should become an automatic felony.
By smoke 7 mirrors
August 10, 2010 7:45 AM | Link to this
Quit spending millions smoking bans dumbass!!