Staffing levels, not space, hinder jail, officials say

The county says it needs more money from area municipalities.
By PETER H. MILLIKEN
VINDICATOR STAFF WRITER
YOUNGSTOWN -- The city of Youngstown has re-asserted its opposition to prisoners' being released prematurely from Mahoning County Jail.
With a supporting resolution of city council attached, the city re-filed its intervention Thursday in a federal lawsuit concerning Mahoning County Jail operations, stating that it is opposed to orders from judges that would release prisoners early.
A panel of three federal judges, which is to consider issuing a prisoner release order, gave potential intervenors until Friday to file motions to intervene in a federal lawsuit by inmates concerning jail conditions. An intervenor enters a suit as a third party to protect its own interests.
The panel rejected the city's earlier intervention attempt, saying the city failed to follow the proper procedure because it didn't file a legal motion setting forth a claim or defense for which intervention is sought.
The inmates filed the class action suit against the county in November 2003, and U.S. District Judge David D. Dowd has been overseeing jail operations since March 2005, when he determined the lockup was overcrowded and unsafe.
Capacity adjustments
After the inmates won their case, the county's insurance counsel and the inmates' lawyers agreed to cap the jail at 296 inmates due to jail understaffing; county common pleas judges adopted a jail release mechanism to keep the jail constitutional; and county commissioners borrowed $7.5 million to keep the jail open.
Because some judges barred early releases of inmates they sentenced, the jail population swelled to 496 inmates and has fallen recently to 410 as the county released inmates to remain constitutional.
In their intervention complaint, city Law Director Iris Torres Guglucello and Deputy Law Director Anthony J. Farris argue that the three-judge panel cannot issue a prisoner release order unless it "finds by clear and convincing evidence that crowding is the primary cause of the violation of a federal right" and that no other remedy is available.
Staffing
The county jail facilities "are currently understaffed, not overcrowded," the city's complaint says. "Understaffing is not a permissible basis for the imposition of a prisoner release order," the city argues. The city says the jail facilities, including the minimum security jail, "are capable of constitutionally housing 660 inmates when adequately staffed." The county's minimum security jail is closed.
"The simplest, least intrusive and narrowest method to correct the underlying constitutional violations in this matter is to order Mahoning County government to adequately staff and fund the jail," the city argues.
County Prosecutor Paul Gains has said the county opposes releasing prisoners, but it has no choice if it is to operate the jail constitutionally, and that is why it is seeking more financial assistance from the city. Without such assistance from Youngstown, Struthers and Campbell, the jail can't be fully opened, Gains said.
Youngstown now pays the county only to house prisoners sent to county jail for violations of city ordinances. The city does not pay to house prisoners jailed there for violations of state law. The majority of prisoners from Youngstown who are in county jail were charged under state law, Farris said.