Clark County officials have adopted a reasonable approach to the frightening prospect of a coronavirus outbreak in the local jail. By evaluating inmates on a case-by-case basis and providing releases to reduce the jail’s population, they have done their best to find the difficult balance between public safety and public health.
Between March 17 and March 20, nearly 200 inmates were released from the jail, reducing the population from 601 to 417. The goal is to reduce crowding and better adhere to social distancing recommendations, lest a COVID-19 outbreak endanger both inmates and corrections officers.
This was not done haphazardly. A panel consisting of Clark County Prosecuting Attorney Tony Golik, Sheriff Chuck Atkins and presiding District and Superior Court judges established criteria for which inmates would be considered for release. As reported by The Columbian: “Prosecutors cooperate with deputies and look at the facts of an inmate’s current case, as well as the person’s criminal history, to determine if they pose a risk were they to be released.” No cases involving sex offenses have been considered, and domestic violence cases typically do not meet the criteria.
People awaiting trial or pre-trial procedures, along with those already sentenced, have been considered. Those released in the midst of their sentence are provided with a return date to serve the rest of their time.
The need for such measures during the coronavirus outbreak is self-evident. A crowded jail can serve as a petri dish for cultivating the virus once it is introduced to the environment, endangering not only inmates but officials and their families, as well as the public when an infected inmate is released.
Counties throughout Washington and in other states also have released inmates, trying to avoid a scenario like that found in New York City. There, a coronavirus outbreak in a city jail has contributed to pressure on the local health care system.
The concern, obviously, is the impact on public safety. Releasing those accused or convicted of a crime can endanger the community and calls for a thoughtful approach to determining which inmates are set free, even temporarily. Several outcomes will bear watching and should be considered in assessing the criminal justice system once the pandemic has passed.
Sociologist Clay Mosher, who teaches criminology at Washington State University Vancouver, raises one question: If inmates could be released with no threat to public safety and return for their trials, did they need to be in jail in the first place? “Of course, at this point in time, it remains an empirical question,” Mosher told The Columbian. “We need to pay attention to short-term trends in local crime.” Those numbers could be skewed, however, with most people remaining at home, limiting their chances of becoming a victim.
Another issue is the likelihood of furloughed inmates returning to serve the remainder of their sentence. Statistics on that will be worth following for a long-term evaluation of the system.
All of this comes as Clark County is considering the future of its persistently overcrowded and increasingly dilapidated jail. Various proposals for a new jail or a renovation of the current one have been examined, and the eventual result will be costly for taxpayers.
For now, the concern is how to protect inmates and officers at the Clark County Jail while also protecting the public. The proposal for releasing inmates and the method for doing so appears to be a good-faith effort to balance those pressing concerns.
