OPTIONS WITHER AS STATE PRISONS FILL

State legislators are facing a no-win situation as they deal with a prison
population that's spiraling upward in tough times.

They can spend hundreds of millions of dollars on prisons and face
criticism for letting other needs go unmet. Or they could reduce sentences
and be labeled soft on crime.

"Both options are painful," said Susan Katzenelson, executive director of
the N.C. Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission. "Prison construction is
incredibly expensive, and reducing sentences is politically risky."

Until Thursday, it looked as if the cell builders would win. But some House
Finance Committee members, alarmed at a prison building provision in the
Senate budget bill that would put the state $391 million deeper in debt,
pushed for a closer look at revising sentencing laws to free up some beds.

Projections show that the state will need to house more than 42,000 inmates
by 2012. Three 1,000-bed prisons opening by the end of this year will only
make a dent in the demand. Another 7,700 beds will still be needed.

"We have three prisons in the budget, and there are other alternatives that
are the recommendations of the sentencing commission," said Rep. Deborah
Ross, a Raleigh Democrat. "There are bills out there that might reduce the
need for prison beds."

Five bills to be exact. But so far, none of them has moved through the
House or Senate.

Combined, they would save $900 million in prison construction and operation
costs over the next decade. They also would free up about 5,600 beds by
reducing sentences for nearly anyone except for those on death row or
serving life in prison.

But attempts to move the bills have met opposition. Law enforcement
officials say legislators are reducing sentences to save beds, not to make
sure the punishment fits the crime. "It's all about reducing demand, and
that's not the way to run the railroad," said Buncombe County District
Attorney Ronald Moore, a sentencing commission member.

Moore points out that the commission's proposals are not recommendations,
just options put forth at the request of legislators.

Since the state moved to structured sentencing in 1994, taking much of the
discretion out of the hands of judges, legislators have toughened
sentencing laws and added felonies. One result is that the prison
population is growing faster than anticipated.

Sen. Wib Gulley, a Durham Democrat who introduced three of the sentencing
commission bills, said they are as much about fairness as they are cutting
costs.

"You have a net savings over 10 years of about 3,100 beds, but you do so
without softening or weakening your treatment of violent, dangerous
criminals," Gulley said. "What you are doing is what structured sentencing
is all about: using your beds for the most violent, dangerous people."

The three prisons being erected in Scotland, Anson and Alexander counties
will cost the state $374 million in construction and financing costs, and
another $54 million a year to operate. When the last one opens by early
next year, the prison system will still need beds for nearly 1,300 inmates.

That's led legislators to suggest all kinds of measures to save money.
They've asked about double-bunking cells, cutting construction costs by
reducing the size of cells, and finding ways to have fewer guards monitor
inmates. Prison officials say those options endanger guards or violate an
inmate's right to humane treatment.

Sen. John Kerr, a Goldsboro Democrat, proposed the three new prisons in the
Senate budget bill. They would use the lease-purchase method being used for
the three prisons now under construction. The method allows a private
contractor to finance and build the prisons, then lease them back to the
state over the next 20 years.

Kerr said building three more prisons now would save the state $25 million
in construction costs. He estimated $10 million of those savings would come
from using the same concrete slab manufacturer, and the rest from not
having to conform to a new building code that takes effect July 1.

One prison would be in Greene County, within Kerr's district. A second
would be in Bertie County, while Columbus County appears to be a
front-runner for the third.

By inserting the prisons into the budget, Kerr circumvented a review by the
House Finance Committee, which typically handles legislation that requires
the issuance of debt. Some took him to task Thursday for not giving them a
chance to weigh in on the proposal.

"I think many of us find it really inappropriate to put something in the
budget without going through the House Finance Committee," said Rep. Joe
Hackney, an Orange County Democrat. "I think instead of speeding up the
process, you've slowed it down."

Kerr said he feared that if the prisons were not in the budget bill, they
would miss the July 1 deadline. He doubted some House members' assertions
that the recommendations had a chance of passing.

"If you all have the political will to change the sentencing laws, do it,"
Kerr said. "But you don't have the political will."

Katzenelson and other criminal justice experts say legislators will likely
have to do both. Kerr's proposed prisons would leave the system about 4,700
beds short by 2012.

"If people really want to solve the problem responsibly, they need to use
some combination," she said. "Five or six new prisons won't suffice, so
does the state have enough money to build other prisons? Yes. But will
there be enough money left for other needs?"

(Sidebar)

options to reduce prison time

The N.C. Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission has offered five ideas
for changes to the state's criminal justice laws that could eliminate the
need for 5,600 beds over the next 10 years.

OPTION 1: Reduce the impact of prior convictions on a person's current
penalty: 1,916 beds.

OPTION 2: Make sentences for subsequent convictions increase
proportionately to prior convictions: 1,306 beds.

OPTION 3: Reduce the minimum sentence for violent offenders by three months
and extend the length of their post-release supervision from nine months to
a year: 613 beds.

OPTION 4: Reduce the sentence for nonviolent habitual felons: 1,763 beds.

OPTION 5: Reduce the penalty for statutory rape or sexual offense of a
person who is 13, 14 or 15 years old in cases when the offender is more
than four years but less than six years older than the victim: 25 beds.