COMMENTARY:

Who's Minding the Store at City-Based Corrections Facilities?

There's a leadership vacuum: State policy makers think the facilities are a "city problem," while city officials--who lack control--feel the situation is beyond their control.

Few people are aware that the booking facility where Smoot was murdered, and the related Baltimore City Detention Center, are run by the State, not Baltimore City. In other words, the fate of the more than 100,000 people that are booked, and the more than 40,000 who are subsequently detained each year, lies largely in the hands of State actors. Yet, because of their location in downtown Baltimore, booking facility and detention center issues are treated merely as “Baltimore City problems” not worthy of broader State attention by policymakers. At the same time, the Mayor and other Baltimore City leaders sometimes view these institutions as out of their hands and play the role of mere bystanders as the fate of their community is largely determined from afar.

This disconnect contributes to a leadership vacuum where problems at these institutions are swept under the rug and largely ignored until they reach crisis proportions and finally receive public attention. In the case of Mr. Smoot, it is painfully obvious that no one has ensured that correctional officers receive and follow adequate training; it is also likely that such officers are spread too thin in light of the clear failure to reduce the severe overcrowding that has plagued the booking facility for years. Finally, the brutality involved raises concerns about whether applicants for these positions are adequately screened and whether there is a commitment to hiring the right people for the job.

Sadly, this leadership vacuum also means that Mr. Smoot’s tragic death is not an isolated incident, but simply one more example of the multitude of related problems that plague these facilities and negatively impact the community. Indeed, Mr. Smoot’s death is outrageous in its brutality, but it is not unusual; the State’s own records show that more than one person dies each month at the booking facility and jail. Injuries also take many forms due to the many problems. For example, a Circuit Court judge recently ordered class action relief because of the State’s failure to bring arrestees before a court commissioner in a timely manner; people arrested for even petty nuisance crimes were routinely being held for days without charge. Because of the severe overcrowding, arrestees also report being held in small cells with 15-20 people, some of whom are physically ill on one another and may have contagious diseases. Against this backdrop, the current medical contractor has announced that it will no longer be providing care, amidst serious allegations of inadequate provision of services in both Maryland and other states where it operates. And, litigation continues over the many unconstitutional conditions found by a U.S. Department of Justice investigation of the detention center. Not surprisingly, the union representing the correctional officers has complained for years that its officers are over-staffed and under-paid. Considering all the circumstances, detainee deaths are foreseeable. Moreover, they are a direct consequence of a sustained failure to commit time and resources to these facilities.

Residents of Baltimore City and of Maryland understand that the public is not safer when its leaders cut corners and ignore what happens behind the jail walls. They understand that unless there are adequate resources to hire and train officers, to provide proper health care, and to provide sufficient alternatives to incarceration and reduce overcrowding and inhumane conditions, that no one is immune from the potentially tragic and more costly results. It is past time for the State and the City to demonstrate leadership on these issues and coordinate a meaningful and sustained commitment to systemic reform. Mr. Smoot’s tragic death should serve as a vehicle for change rather than simply another sad statistic.