Jail Expansion Funding Approved

Editor's note: If you appreciate being able to read posts like this one, and want to ensure ANC's ability to provide more content like this, please click here to demonstrate your support and become a paid subscriber.

On the evening of June 26, 2018 the Shasta County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved $325,000 in capital expenditures for construction in the jail anticipating state approval for 38 additional jail beds, which would bring the total to 102 new beds, potentially by year end. This new development is due to the continued efforts of Custody Captain Kent working with the Board of State and Community Corrections.

The Board of Supervisors directed County Executive Officer Larry Lees to move forward with architectural designs for Court Rooms 1 and 2, which could add 64 additional beds, upon the courthouse vacating these rooms once the new court house is built.

Additional direction from the Board provides authorization to County Executive Office Larry Lees to explore development of an “Adult Jail Diversion” program. This program is expected to remove, potentially, 300 chronically homeless, and those with substance use disorders, from our streets which is expected to reduce the number of individuals booked in to the jail.

Lastly, the Board agreed to receive information regarding a potential Public Safety Tax at the July 17, 2018 regular Board of Supervisors meeting.

Avatar
-from press release
Comment Policy: We welcome your comments, with some caveats: Please keep your comments positive and civilized. If your comment is critical, please make it constructive. If your comment is rude, we will delete it. If you are constantly negative or a general pest, troll, or hater, we will ban you from the site forever. The definition of terms is left solely up to us. Comments are disabled on articles older than 90 days. Thank you. Carry on.

6 Responses

  1. Well this actually a pretty informative press release. Apparently, we’re just a few short steps away from having the jail capacity indicated in the last needs assessment. “Operating costs” i.e. hiring more people for those good local government jobs, is no longer a roadblock. Or is it? And why given all the attention people give to public safety in this town, aren’t readers more interested in this subject?

    • Avatar Tim says:

      I think readers are less interested for 2 reasons:

      1) they’ll believe it when they see it (as you alluded, we’ve repeatedly had millions in available CapEx evaporate for lack of operating expense)

      2) News consumers seem increasingly unwilling to follow stories that can’t be summed dramatically in 160 characters or less

    • Avatar Time For Change says:

      I would be MUCH more interested in this if they had not turned down the Millions in Cannabis Money! Now they want a Tax Increase to pay for all this…..WTH? You guys turn down Millions of Dollars of Tax money, Hundreds of Jobs,State Grants, Money to Clean up the old Grows out there and now want a TAX INCREASE?
      I better stop here before I Tip my easy chair over!

    • Avatar Joanne Lobeski Snyder says:

      I’m confused R.V. I just read ” The 2017-
      2018 Shasta County Grand Jury’s review of County documents and records revealed that the
      Shasta County Jail had a reduction in available inmate beds beginning in the early 1990s.” If this means that the jail at one time had more room for inmates (it is a huge building), why would the jail population spill over into the soon to be old court house? How many beds were available in the 90s as compared to now? I ask because I worked for a school district that could have built new classrooms but used portables trailers for many classrooms. The thinking was that student’s who attend classes in portables are considered “unhoused” students. The more “unhoused” students you had, the higher you were on a list to get monies from the State.

      • Avatar Tim says:

        The jail opened in 1984 with 237 beds. By 1994 most of the cells had been double-bunked, bringing capacity to 381.

        The work farm / detention annex held an additional 114 beds for low risk offenders. We also had crystal creek with its 45 beds.

        When the detention annex and crystal creek closed, Shasta County lost 159 beds. If all goes well, this proposal will add back only 102 beds – still less than we had in the 90s…