Villines tells cities jail plan calls for per-inmate charge

Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines has informed mayors in the county that he has prepared an ordinance under which -- in the absence of a new jail funding agreement -- the county would charge each city a set amount per inmate per day to incarcerate city prisoners.

Because the current interlocal jail agreement among the county and its five largest cities expires in August, Villines said the county would begin charging cities per inmate in September. A draft of the ordinance leaves blank the daily rate that would be charged.

The Pulaski County Quorum Court meets next on July 8.

Cities have already set budgets, including jail contributions, through the end of the year. Mayors have indicated that they are not concerned about the August deadline because their budget appropriations are set, but county officials feel the situation is more urgent.

"Without an agreement, it's questionable whether they can continue to pay," Villines added, noting that any payments after August would be under expired terms.

Earlier, Villines proposed an immediate 5 percent increase in payments from the county's five biggest cities -- Little Rock, North Little Rock, Sherwood, Jacksonville and Maumelle -- and a 3 percent inflation rate every year afterward for the next 10 years.

Cammack Village and Wrightsville have contributed small amounts of money to the jail since 80 beds were opened last year but they are not included in the proposal for a new contract. Instead, they would fall under the terms in the ordinance, if it passes.

Charging per inmate may prove a greater expense for cities than what they pay now or what they would pay under Villines' proposal, according to county calculations that were included in a memo Villines sent mayors last week about the proposed ordinance.

Acting County Attorney Amanda Mitchell said the county has not yet decided on a daily rate to charge cities but indicated that there may be separate rates for the first day a person is held in the jail and the days afterward.

In figures supplied to the cities, the county calculated estimates of the actual cost for holding each city's inmates in 2013. The cost was higher than what each city paid under the current interlocal agreement. The first-day cost for each inmate was listed as $244.49, and subsequent days were calculated at $42.35.

Based on an average of 72 hours before an inmate sees a judge and/or bails out, the county estimated that Little Rock would have paid $2.9 million for holding costs in 2013, or about $1.2 million more than it actually paid under the current jail funding agreement.

In addition to its interlocal agreement commitment, Little Rock remitted about $400,000 to the county in district court fines received from people found guilty.

North Little Rock, which paid $759,764 to hold its prisoners in 2013, would have also paid about $1.2 million more than under the current agreement. Sherwood would have paid six times the amount it did in 2013 -- $766,165 compared with $127,047.

Arkansas Code Annotated 12-41-506 states, "In the absence of an agreement on jail costs between a county and all municipalities having law enforcement agencies in the county, the quorum court in a county in this state may by ordinance establish a daily fee to be charged municipalities for keeping prisoners of municipalities in the county jail."

According to an order in a 1989 lawsuit filed against Pulaski County by cities in it, a person is a county inmate if he has been bound over to circuit court, which is operated by the county and state. If not, the person is a municipal inmate.

A 2009 opinion from the office of Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel concludes that "a city is liable to the county for a prisoner arrested by a city officer on felony charges until such time as the prisoner is formally charged."

People are formally charged when they first appear in court, which is generally about 48 to 72 hours after being arrested, Mitchell said.

Mark Hayes, director of legal services for the Arkansas Municipal League, said his interpretation of Arkansas code is that a municipal inmate is a person who has violated municipal code, meaning a person who violates county code or state law is instead a county prisoner.

Hayes referred to Arkansas Code 12-41-506, which also states: "When a person is sentenced to a county jail for violating a municipal ordinance, the municipality shall be responsible for paying the fee established by an agreement or ordinance of the quorum court in the county."

The league is currently defending Blytheville in a Mississippi County lawsuit that deals with when a person is considered a municipal inmate, but he said any ruling in that case would not apply to Pulaski County unless the Arkansas Supreme Court were to eventually hear an appeal and rule on it.

Under Hayes' definition of a municipal inmate, very few people held in the Pulaski County jail in recent years would be considered municipal inmates, he said.

If checking the Pulaski County jail or some other jails today, he said, "You're not going to find anyone [held] for municipal misdemeanor or county misdemeanor, because they're holding other people."

Little Rock Mayor Mark Stodola has asked Hayes to review the draft ordinance and proposed interlocal agreement from Villines.

Unlike the current interlocal agreement between the county and cities, Villines' memo to mayors contains individual contracts, meaning each city can choose whether to enter into a jail funding contract. A city opting out would thus be subject to the proposed ordinance, if it is passed.

Meanwhile, talk of negotiations continue. Not all mayors in the county are on board with Villines' proposal to increase payments by 5 percent immediately and 3 percent each year afterward.

Stodola is still contacting mayors about extending the current agreement for one more year and said he's trying to organize another meeting among the mayors to discuss the issue.

Stodola said he's not interested in paying more when the state is paying the county too little for housing state prisoners and when the jail isn't taking all of the municipal inmates Little Rock district judges want to send there.

Stodola said the county is trying to get cities to pay up when the state should be paying more instead and that he thinks some of the discussion should wait until after this week's special legislative session. The session will address opening the 160 remaining unfunded beds at the county jail -- located in the work center across the street from the main jail building -- to house state inmates.

Maumelle Mayor Mike Watson and Sherwood Mayor Virginia Hillman said they would like to see the inflation factor in Villines' proposal based on cost-of-living adjustments rather than a 3 percent increase every year. However, both said they would pass along the proposal to their city councils for discussion next month.

Because the original agreement increased cities' charges at a fixed amount only every five years, the county has picked up most of the inflation costs. Villines has argued that an inflation factor in the new agreement is critical.

Jacksonville Mayor Gary Fletcher said he thinks his city is paying more than it should already.

The 1994 agreement was largely based on how much the cities paid to operate their own jails before closing them in the 1990s in favor of sending inmates to the county jail. Counties are required by state law to have jails, but cities are not.

At one point, Jacksonville was larger than Sherwood, but Sherwood has since eclipsed it while paying $64,000 less per year than Jacksonville for the jail based on the current agreement, Fletcher said.

North Little Rock Mayor Joe Smith was not available this week, spokesman Nathan Hamilton said, and had not had time to review the memo.

But Fletcher, Hillman and Watson all said they would prefer to come to a new agreement as soon as possible, rather than delaying it another year. Along with Stodola, all said their city boards would have to approve any agreement.

"We've got to get another contract established," Hillman said. "We can't just go every year just trying to go year by year."

A section on 06/29/2014

Upcoming Events