County sheriff takes issue with jail budget restrictions by state

Most Washington County residents likely consider the county budget as a fiscal matter under the control of the county commissioners. And until LD 2080, An Act to Better Coordinate and Reduce the Cost of the Delivery of State and County Correctional Services, came into effect, the county commissioners had the authority to approve all county operations budgets and raise or lower taxes accordingly.

Signed into law by Governor Baldacci in 2008 as emergency legislation, the act caps property tax dollars dedicated to county corrections operations. The legislation requires county commissioners to cap county tax dollars spent on corrections budgets at the 2008 level, with additional jail expenses to be paid by the state. This measure also gives the newly formed State Board of Corrections authority over each county's jail budget, future capital expenditures and the role of determining which existing facilities will close and when new facilities will be built.

LD 2080 in effect freezes the Washington County Commissioners' ability to increase or decrease funding via county revenue for the Washington County jail system. The cap of $2,000,525 for the 2008 budget is the maximum amount the county can now raise to support corrections operations. LD 2080 affects only the corrections portion of the budget and does not affect the sheriff's department's patrol budget.

Kate Dufour, writing for the Maine Municipal Association, has stated, "As provided for in the law, the property tax dollars necessary to fund county jail operations are capped at the 2008 level, which is $62.5 million. Any additional county jail expenses are to be funded with state resources." Thus, the freeze this places on property tax increases does not limit the amount of other tax and state revenue that can be spent on correctional facilities.

Washington County Sheriff Donnie Smith is taking issue with the legislation on several fronts. Smith is upset that the state now has the power to cap his budget and insist on a 1.6% reduction on a budget that contains fixed costs such as negotiated union contracts. Since the county commissioners negotiate the union contract and Smith points out that the contract has already been through state arbitration, with the union winning raise and benefit issues, Smith does not have the legal authority to make changes to the contract. Given six days by the Department of Corrections to reduce his budget recently, Smith's only option may be to cut one corrections officer position and therefore the inmate population as well, since mandated officer-to-prisoner ratios could not be maintained. After Smith was elected sheriff, he trimmed the Washington County corrections budget by 20%. Facing the trimmed budget and now being pushed by the state Board of Corrections to reduce proposed funding for 2010, Smith questions the "emergency" nature of the bill.

Additionally Smith notes that LD 2080 allowed for the state to pick up the debt load of county corrections operations in 2008. Washington County had no debt burden and did not require a "state bailout." When Smith was elected he cut his department's budget and created a lean corrections budget at that time. Historically, the sheriff's budget was reviewed and approved by the county budget committee and county commissioners. While the Washington County Commissioners are now reviewing Smith's 2010 corrections budget and are looking for ways to trim the 1.6% requested by the state Board of Corrections, the state board has the final authority over jail budgets and expense. Smith wonders not only where the state will find the resources to cover county jail costs but questions if this is not "taxation without representation."

Smith raised the following issues, which also affect the county corrections budget. Washington County has no sitting superior court justice, which can result in longer holding times of prisoners at the jail. If a prisoner is sentenced for fewer than nine months, he or she stays at the county jail. Presently the jail is adjacent to the courthouse. If a new jail were to take its place, transportation costs would go up dramatically. Penobscot County prisoner transportation costs rose by $250,000 when the jail moved one half mile away from the courthouse, according to Smith.

Smith acknowledges that there are some good features of the new legislation, such as collaboration among the counties to go out to bid for certain items and sharing transportation costs. He quickly points out, however, that the Washington County Sheriff's Department was already participating in a "hub system" with several other counties.

The relay system when inmates are transferred in vehicles over long distances allows for another county to assist with the transfer. Smith states that the state corrections officers do not participate in this system. The agreement, according to Smith, saves transportation costs when sheriffs transfer prisoners to a destination at a distance.

The centralization of power and authority over the county jail budgets and operations is meant to reduce costs to taxpayers. The impact will freeze the amount of property tax used to fund the county corrections system. Importantly, however, additional revenues for the increase in state funding of the county corrections system will need to be raised, and local control over the county corrections budget is no longer a reality, according to Smith.

Denise Lord, deputy commissioner of the Department of Corrections, could not be reached for comment.