With just two months before we’re asked to sign a $124.7 million check for a new jail and sheriff’s office, some folks who have been silent about other issues of inhumanity have decided that it’s time to get loud about the conditions of our county jail under the notion that building nicer cages is more humane.
I reject that premise.
I also reject the premise that we are just “talking about the building” and we are unable to try to address any aspect of the larger criminal punishment system.
My biggest disappointment is how much of the planning for the jail proposal has happened without the public and without having these larger conversations. We cannot accept the idea that this is “just a building” outside of the context of the system itself, which disproportionately harming Black and brown folks, trans folks, immigrants, unhoused folks, low income folks.
I believe most people really do want safe communities. How we get there is important.
Meanwhile, we continue to see the dehumanization of the people incarcerated in our jail consistently showing up in this conversation. Do they deserve less space than a dog? Do they deserve to be housed in a cage instead of a home? Do they deserve to die while in the state’s custody?
A surprising number of people seem to say yes.
I agree that the county has a responsibility to humanely house incarcerated people under its care, but humane treatment has never been limited to a building.
We should have pause seeing Sheriff Kunkel end his partnership with CommUnity for a mental health liaison, speaking against field mediation as a dispute resolution outside of law enforcement, and walking away from a collaboration with Iowa City. If this is a “yes, and” moment and we build a new jail, will the sheriff work on the important partnerships that give us our diversion and prevention programs? Yes we can build a new jail, and we can commit to sustaining and growing our alternatives?
All too often, we see “yes, and” become just the “yes.”
Should there be a future proposal, or modifications to the current one, after Nov. 3, I would like to see these included: Direct sunlight into cells. Access to outdoor exercise. Contact visitation. The elimination of third-party, for-profit communication tools. Commitments to outside partnerships, moving money currently used for transportation to diversion programs with metrics and goals, and not contracting with outside agencies. Disposal of the MRAP. Fewer cells. A reduction in the office spaces. Policies that protect the people under the county’s care and real accountability when they’re violated. A position outside the County Attorney’s and Sheriff’s offices to oversee county diversion and prevention programs with its own budget and oversight power. And a community-wide goal of zero incarceration, even if it’s not in our lifetimes.
Some of these are inconvenient. Some are hard. Some will require compromise. But we have always been a community that doesn’t settle for conventional solutions, and we shouldn’t here, either.