Jail-sites fight: 2 neighborhood groups’ discussions; city adds FAQ

| Neighborhoods | West Seattle jail sites | West Seattle news

Three quick updates in the fight over where the city might build a potential new jail for misdemeanor offenders (it’s announced 4 sites as finalists, and 2 of them are in southeast West Seattle): First, the city’s added another page to its informational web site — the new Frequently Asked Questions page features its answers to some of the questions it’s received. Second, two more neighborhood groups discussed their positions on the issue last night; the Fauntleroy Community Association‘s board “voiced its opposition to the siting of jails in residential areas on the basis of land-use planning policy and the unnecessary costs and logistics of inmate transfers and lack of access to services needed by inmates (legal, bail, and city services),” according to Lynn Olson; meantime, we were at the Admiral Neighborhood Association meeting as members considered whether to sign on to a letter officially opposing the sites, and it’s decided to abstain for now. Third, the 34th District Democrats will discuss the jail-sites fight at their regular monthly meeting tonight, 7 pm, The Hall @ Fauntleroy.

chas redmond June 11, 2008 (7:40 pm)

This is a quote from the Justice Department report on siting correctional institutions in communities:

Americans traditionally resist what they perceive to be heavy-handed incursions by state authorities into local affairs, even if these incursions can be shown to be beneficial. While the state has the constitutional and legal right to inject itself into local affairs, it does so only occasionally and with great caution. This is because the legal right of the state to act does not necessarily convey the power or justification for doing so.
–
The decision about where to site a new correctional facility is ften fought in the political arena. Because political power is inequitably distributed, those areas with strong representation in the legislature and those with powerful local interest groups who have access to state decisionmakers can often resist the placement of unwanted facilities within their communities.
–
Legislatures have succumbed to political pressure many times, settling siting debates by refusing to appropriate funds for sites that meet all technical standards but are politically controversial. They typically locate the facility elsewhere. These alternate locations are usually in rural areas or urbanized areas near lower-income neighborhoods that lack substantial political power.
–
Those with less political power often find they have no role in the decisionmaking process and, therefore, little choice in the matter. The result is unhappiness, bitterness, and controversy, as those with less power are forced to accept what others were able to turn away.
————–
The report is at this link http://www.seattle.gov/municipaljail/docs/DOJ_study_010591.pdf – it’s well worth reading, as are the Q&As from the city.

Kat June 11, 2008 (9:09 pm)

Just checked out the map they provided for “proximity to schools”. Seems they didn’t do much homework here… The “school” they cite near the Federal parking lot site (a much better choice in MHO – one of the final 11) isn’t a school at all. It is the district administration building. The closest actual school to that site is almost 2 miles away and on the other side of I-5. I wonder how many other interesting half-truths there are in that map. I will be working on this further for the Highland Park Action Committee…

16th & Trenton June 11, 2008 (9:11 pm)

out of curiosity, why on earth is the admiral neighborhood association abstaining?

Kat June 11, 2008 (9:13 pm)

Of course, all of the downtown and near-stadium sites that they nixed for some reason (too convenient to social services, transit, and too far away from young children for them) are also well over a mile from schools when you factor out the admin. building and factor in I-5.

Sorry, comment time is over.