With the start of realignment that began this month, we are all acutely aware of the added burden the state is placing on counties. This only adds to the necessity of solving our jail overcrowding problem.
My concern during my tenure as a supervisor has been to focus on what the tremendous cost of a new, large-scale jail will add to our budget, particularly if the full complement of beds is built out, practically doubling our capacity when the new jail is complete.
Like all of my colleagues on the board, I have met individually with the sheriff and with his jail planning team, and we have all attended study sessions on the jail. I have raised a number of issues and all of those issues were answered by the Sheriff’s Office to my satisfaction.
A board majority has now authorized the county to submit a conceptual application for state funding to help in the construction phase of the jail. We should not forgo this possibility, no matter how much or how little money Sacramento ultimately decides to grant us. I voted to support the Sheriff’s Office recommendation on the size of the jail contained in Option B, but at the Oct. 4 board meeting, I also expressed some caveats.
One: If at all possible, I would like the women’s facility to be separate from the men’s facility. I know that the Sheriff’s Office is sensitive to the issues that women face in prisons and jail and I applaud their pursuit of gender-based programming. I want to be sure that our women’s facility is a model for the state, if not the country, for gender-based programs with extended visiting opportunities for the children of incarcerated women. And I don’t mean just the women in transitional housing, I mean all women in our facilities with children under 5 years of age.
Second: The Sheriff’s Office proposal shows a stacking of modules with the top floor as vacant space for potential future expansion. I understand from talking with the sheriff that the model that we have seen is only conceptual and that the final design decisions will be made by the architectural team. I would ask that the jail design team consider placing the future expansion in a position where it can be used for other potential uses. Perhaps it could be placed either on the ground floor or be a separate part of a module attached to the larger facility or even the women’s facility if at all possible. I am concerned that if it is at the top of what looks like a maximum security facility, it will have no other use than jail capacity. I have been assured that the design process will consider these and other factors.
Recommended for you
Third: I do support an expansion of re-entry programs. The jail models I have seen to date appear to be medium to maximum security. I will advocate that the final design permit state-of-the-art re-entry programs. It is my understanding that future state funding will be predicated on how successful our correctional system is in lowering the recidivism rate.
Fourth: If jail facilities and services are to be expanded, and indeed that is the whole point of realignment, and while I believe that public safety is the highest priority for local government, jails aren’t the only part of public safety. What I cannot accept is the possibility that a new jail will solve one set of problems only to create a whole new set of problems elsewhere because of finances. This fiscal threat to the safety net services for our most needy residents is unacceptable to me.
It will be imperative to find realistic ways to offset the added costs without damaging the very services that focus on the neediest and most at-risk people in our county. Adding $20 million or $30 million or $40 million to our annual budget must be balanced with serious discussion of how to pay for these new responsibilities without bankrupting health or social services or closing parks and libraries. We are in this together and we must approach this fiscal challenge with the same serious examination as the sheriff and my colleagues have already put into jail planning.
Don Horsley is a member of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors. He represents District Three, which covers Atherton, Redwood Shores, Half Moon Bay, Pacifica, San Carlos, Portola Valley, Woodside and unincorporated areas of the coast.

(0) comments
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.