PRISON NEEDS

N.C. Should Build More Cells And Trim Some Sentences

Why is it that when crime rates have gone down, North Carolina's prison
population is going up? Many factors are involved, including these: The
state's population has continued to rise, the courts keep sending criminals
to prison, and prisoners now serve all the time they're sentenced to. The
result: North Carolina is facing a big problem -- again.

Unless something changes, within 10 years the state will have a prison
system built for a little more than three-fourths of its inmates. That's
why the 2003 General Assembly should trim sentences to relieve short-term
pressure on prison space -- and consider either further sentence reductions
or construction of more cells, or both.

These are not easy choices. But the alternative is unpalatable to citizens
in a state that spent much of the 1990s rebuilding its prison system.
Federal court orders and inmate lawsuits had led to a cap on the inmate
population of the scandalously overcrowded prison system, forcing the
release of many prisoners who had served only a small portion of their
sentences. No one wants a return of those days.

Yet recent projections from the N.C. Sentencing and Policy Advisory
Commission lay out a scenario that could prompt a recurrence. The state's
prisons currently have a maximum operating capacity of just under 32,000
inmates, yet the state projects an inmate population of 34,570 by June 30.
When three new prisons come online in 2005, the capacity will be about
34,700 -- yet the inmate population is projected to be 37,700.

No other prisons are on the drawing boards, yet in 2012, the projected
prison population could be about 42,400 -- some 7,700 more inmates than the
system was built to hold. Only time will tell if those figures are
accurate, but the Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission's models have
been reliable in the past. That's why the state must act.

The commission has recommended tinkering with some sentences as a start.
One option would reduce the penalty for statutory rape by a person 4 to 6
years older than the victim. Another would trim the sentence for repeat
felons who commit a Class C felony, the third most serious felony level, or
less. Another would provide post-release supervision to replace the last
three months of some sentences. Even small cuts will help -- a little.

But unless the legislature opts for dramatic sentencing changes and
restores alternative punishments, the state will also need new prisons. It
doesn't have the money to build them now, but it does have the option of
negotiating contracts with private companies to build new facilities that
would be leased back or sold back to the state.

Over 20 years, the lease/purchase cost of three prisons would be about $391
million, including $157 million in interest. That's a lot of money, but the
alternative -- not having space for the worst offenders -- could be even
more costly.

Whether a lease-purchase agreement is the best way to build these prisons
is a policy choice lawmakers must ponder. It's not ideal, but neither is
running thousands of cells short in less than a decade. If lawmakers can't
find an alternative, they should move ahead to provide the space.