Friday, October 05, 2012

A surprise endorsement

The critique of the justice center ballot issue has mostly been a critique of the larger justice system itself. It's a critique I largely agree with. Too many people in our society are punished for the wrong reasons, and too many of the incarcerated are black or brown or poor.

It's also a local problem, with the Iowa City Police Department and Campus Security over-zealously pursuing minor drug and alcohol crimes, over-enforcing bad laws that many of us don't even believe should BE laws. We also have a statistically significant driving while black problem that needs to stop.

I have attended justice center meetings off and on for several years. I have long been convinced of the actual need, but I had intended to vote no because of this other set of issues. I really, really wanted the existing jail to be full of drunk college students and harmless pot smokers.

The problem is, that's not true. And I can't in intellectual honesty oppose the justice center anymore. Today I'm making the biggest liberal flip-flop since Birkenstocks were invented.

Local prosecutors, the sheriff, and the courts are caught in the middle between bad laws and bad enforcement, with most of the responsibility and little of the discretion. The current sheriff and county attorney have done far more to explore jail altenatives for mental health and substance abuse than their predecessors. Not enough for me; I still think the "alternative" the average pot smoker needs is to be left alone. But within the framework of existing law, our alternatives program is a good one. Unfortunately, it's maxed out due to lack of space. And many people who would otherwise be eligible are shipped out to all points of the compass and unable to participate.

Opponents charge that more cell space will encourage more arrests - and we need to watch our police department and their bosses, the city council, carefully on that. But more cell space will also keep those awaiting their day in court closer to family and friends who can offer emotional support, and allow the accused better access to their attorneys. More meeting areas will mean more privacy for the accused to consult with their lawyers; right now this happens in the lobby. More courtrooms will mean more judges and speedier trials, which for the innocent will mean speedier returns home.

This is about safety for the public: for jurors, for abuse victims, for witnesses, and for the accused. The new secure entrance will keep the public safer, and secure passage from the jail to the courtroom will protect the public from the genuinely dangerous. Expanded and more modern cell areas will also protect the accused from other inmates who could do them harm.

Our old courthouse is a beautiful historic site, but it offers literally a back door to justice for the disabled. New courtrooms in the new part of the complex will give our justice center true ADA accessibility to most court functions.

A protest no vote sends a muddled message: No because of the dollar amount? No because of the justice system? We can argue about the big picture another day. And we should.

This vote, this ballot issue, is about tangible things that will bring real world justice to the accused, the victims, the general public, and yes, even the guilty. And the clear message is yes. Please join me in flipping your ballot and voting Yes on the justice center.


Mark Andrews said...

I'm not part of your local community but my extended family is. I just wanted to commend you on your concise and well written blog. And changing your mind because of more evidence or as the result of honest debate isn't flip-flopping, it is a sign of reason. If only more people on both sides showed the same, this country would be in such a better place. BZ.

Ansan said...

If you agree that:

"... the Iowa City Police Department and Campus Security over-zealously pursuing minor drug and alcohol crimes, over-enforcing bad laws that many of us don't even believe should BE laws."

Then this needs to be seen for what it is, a systemic, ongoing crime against humanity. Incarcerating people who do not need to be incarcerated is the very definition of tyranny, and the US is far-and-away the world leader in the incarceration rate of its own citizenry. I cannot agree with countenancing oppression by purchasing a fancy new facility for my oppressor in the hopes of establishing a dialogue with them later. Vote NO for the new jail.

Sick of Spin said...

I'm voting no for the following reasons:
1. This proposal is far more than is necessary. It's platinum plated, we only need silver plating.
2. Sheriff Pulkrabek wants to rent jail space to law enforcement agencies outside the county. This won't bring in revenue, it will require additional operational costs, additional administration, additional staffing, an excuse for increased Pulkrabek payroll. $48.6 million is a very low-balled figure.
3. Shipping felons into Johnson County is a bad idea.
4. As long as the current crop of Supervisors are in charge, there will be screwups, I cite the JECC as proof. There are still multiple problems there that need to be resolved but aren't because of pettiness.

Jody in Iowa said...

Reply to Sick of Spin: I suggest you tour the Courthouse. You will see the crowding, and the crumbling walls in the basement; but most of all you will see that there is no security other than two--yes only two--deputies on duty, and multiple ways that weapons can be brought into the building and those convicted (especially in the small courtroom on the lowest floor) can make a run for the back door. Will it take a tragedy to make the public understand that in this new society when everyone has guns, the safety of courthouse officials (and the public) becomes paramount? As to the jail space, the population of the area is expanding isn't it? It's likely that those cells would be pretty much filled by Johnson Co. folk within a very few years.