Jeff Bergosh Blog: The Political Economy of GPS Ankle Monitors and Drug Patches

Guidelines

I am one member of a five person board. The opinions I express on this forum are mine only, and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Escambia County Staff, Administrators, Employees, or anyone else associated with Escambia County Florida. I am interested in establishing this blog as a means of additional transparency to the public, outreach to the community, and information dissemination to all who choose to look. Feedback is welcome, but because public participation is equally encouraged, appropriate language and decorum is mandatory. Although this is not my campaign site for re-election--sometimes campaign related information will be discussed, therefore in an abundance of caution I add the following : Political Advertisement Paid for and Approved by Jeff Bergosh, Republican, for Escambia County Commissioner District 1

Wednesday, June 13, 2018

The Political Economy of GPS Ankle Monitors and Drug Patches

Does the release of jail inmates via bail and GPS Ankle Monitors really save the county money?

There has been a push at the BCC to provide alternatives for Judges to utilize, if they so choose, to sending people to our Jail. For those Judges that want to control actions/locations of offenders but who are also cognizant of the costs of incarceration locally, we have a county program to pay for GPS ankle monitors and/or drug patches. The program was grant-funded, but the funds from the grant recently dried up.

According to one Judge with whom I spoke that wanted to put a person on a GPS ankle monitor and drug patch--he was told that "There is no more money available for this"

"That's ridiculous" I told him. "I'll fund it myself if necessary--out of my discretionary funds if need be."

So I asked the question of relevant staff. I mean, if the average cost of incarceration is $72 daily but an ankle monitor and drug patch combo is only roughly $10 dollars per day--is it not a no-brainer to fund the patches and GPS monitors to save money at the jail?

Apparently, the answer is not so simple.

The actual savings realized when a prisoner (one of 1500 or so) is removed from our jail is not actually $72 daily---it is more like $3.00 daily-for the cost of food. This is because the jail's hard, fixed costs are high in order to service a population so high--and no appreciable reduction in total fixed costs will be realized by releasing a single prisoner (except in cases where the prisoner requires high-dollar medicines or medical treatments). It would take several hundred fewer to realistically reduce fixed costs, close a pod, reduce staffing, etc.

So in the big picture, reducing one prisoner saves very little money for the jail, but actually costs the county money out of a different fund for the patches, ankle monitors, and electronic surveillance. And there is not currently a system that compels payment for these services by the released prisoners, nor is there currently a means-test or similar method in place to ensure those that can afford to pay for the monitoring actually pay.

According to one staffer with whom I spoke: "The grant [for GPS and patches] was for the purpose of providing funding for the patches to reduce our jail population." she continued "But the program did not reduce the jail population--our population actually remained consistent and we spent a lot

more money on patches and ankle monitors beyond what we received in the grant. When I report back to the Federal Government that we did not reduce our population but that we did use all the grant money for the monitors--I think that will not be well received, this isn't the outcome they are looking for"

"What happened--why did this not work?" I asked.

"This is only speculation, but I think once the word was out that we had the grant funding to cover the costs--Judges that would have released these offenders anyway, on bond, also ordered the monitors and drug patches as well--as an extra measure of deterrent perhaps?"

So the bottom line is we are still paying--even though the grant funding has dried up, and that message has been forwarded back through the proper channels to the judges. But there is a cost to this program, a real cost.

"Between Oct-17 and May-18, we have expensed $126,032.64 on electronic monitoring (GPS and alcohol combined) and collected $48,850.46 in payments. We h ave expensed $95,006.05 on drug patches (pre-trial, misdemeanor, and state probation offenders ordered at our expense combined). These costs do not reflect staff time and only encompass the invoices due for supplies/services." related this same staff member.

So the takeaway from my perspective is that this whole process needs to be examined, and the ball is already rolling on that I am told.

Meanwhile, we will fund these patches and GPS monitors for the Judges that want to use these services--because we need the space in our jail and we really don't have a choice if the Judge says so.

But I want to work to find a way for the offender to pay for these services whenever possible--we need to make this process more efficient for the taxpayers.