Minutes 05/23/1944 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Nay 23rd, 1944. the Board of Supervisors) had secured estimates of the number of female prisoners the County would be required to ta~ke care of under this plan and that he did not believe Norfolk County could care' for these prisoners without enlarging the jail", Never at any' time has this office intimated or suggested that Norfolk County would be required to ho~se in in the-Norfolk County Jail more female prisoners than the present Jail Could comfortably house. The~ was- no recommendation or sugg~estion that Norfolk Oounty would be required to provide Bore Jail space than already exists. The whole plan was based on the thought that female prisoners could be properly and adequately housed without any new construct, ion. The whole desire of this Department is to eliminate the necessity for constructing additional Jail facilities and to provide proper segregation and care for female prisoners. ~"~erefore, it would appear that the one and only reason given by the Norfolk Coun- ty Board of Supervisors for not accepting one of the two suggested proposals for housing fe - male prisoners does not exist in fact. Under either one of the two plans suggested in our letter of April 24th, 1944, it would have cost the taxpayers about $6,000°00 a year in matrons~ salaries. To main - rain matrons at all three of the Jails would cost the taxpayers about $16,500. each year in salaries. This office does not feel that it would be Justified in recommending $16,500. a ~ear in salaries for matrons of three jails that are located as close together as these three ails. The authorities of Norfolk O~ity hav~e~indicated that since they have a large number of women prisoners, they are willing To provzae their o~ facilities for properly taking care of the women prisoners of that city now that Norfolk 0ounty has decllined to enter into one or the other of the proposed arrangements for caring for them. The women prisoners of Portsmouth Oity and Norfolk County are not pro - perly housed so far as segregation is conceraed; and they are not under the supervision of ma~ trons. This offiae,~ therefore~ feels that facilities for proper segregation and care of female prisoners should be provided in either the Portsmouth City Jail or the Norfolk County Jail and that matrons should be employed to supervise them. By proper facilities it meant that the quarters for female prisoners will be separated by the necessary partitions so that in no way will male prisoners come in contact with female prisoners or communicate with them; that the entrances be so arranged that female prisoners and matrons will not have to pass through any portion of the Jail occupied by or used by male prisoners. This arrs~gement would call for approximately $9,000. in salaries for matrons per year (if the salaries for matrons for the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth and. Norfolk County are taken into consideration). It Just does not appear to be economical or sound administration not t o incarcerate female prisoners from Norf~olk County and Portsmouth City in one of the other Jails with proper facilities and supervision. Roanoke, Lynchburg, and other localities of the State have provided pro- per segregation and supervision. Richmond has recently appropriated funds for extensive re = pairs in the jail, which will provide proper segregation and supervision. It does not appear that the ~ggestion for Norfolk County and Portsmouth to do likewise is unreasonable. It is not the desire of this Department to prolong the re-opening of the ~orf01k County Jail. However, female prisoners are not being properly segregated or super - ~lsed in either Portsmouth City or Norfolk County Jail; and it does appear proper tD~t this matter should be definitely settled and such changes made at this time that will be required for these jails to meet the standards of this Department. As stated above~ this Department will have to insist on proper segrega- tion and supervision o f female prisoners from Norfolk 0ounty and Portsmouth City because ugly incidents have happened in both jails which make it appear ~hat this should be done." honolOthe-bo"Irabl dY and in addit cna ~ SOlution s~ attachingiheret°earep°rt of the City Manager that has been! reque$1~ed by which t am recommending we adop~I your ~At your .reguls~ meeting held on April 25tJu~ 1944, the question of af - fairs of the Jail was brought on the Council floor and the Council authorize6 the Manager to prepare and make a report at an early date~ I am ore~uming that the~honorable body is referring to the physics~ as- nects of~the.J.a~it~ as the City. a.nager or ~he uouncil has no~hing to do with the administra -- · ion of the jazz affairs as ~his ms entire±y up to the City Sergeant. It basemen r~moreda~but generally t~hat the jail was almost a place in which humans should ~not be incarcerated and in accordance with the laws of our Commonwealth the City of Portsmouth appears to have carried out its responsibility up to the present date. For ready reference, i am attaching hereto a series of exb1~bits which have b~ee~ alphabetized for ready reference and I shall attemnt ~o exolain each exhibit with a summarization at the end of this report. ~ - E~!bit A Under date of Janus. fy ~ 2nd~ 1943, I wrote Mr~ R. N. Toue!l, Commissioner of Corrections, suggesting that the City of Portsmouth be assisted in the creation of a Jail farm which would allow a healthier and more human method of incarceration and attached hereto~ kno~m as Exhi - bit A, is a letter from the Commissioner of Corredtlons, which I believe is self-explanatory. Ex~t bi t B At our regular meeting on February 3rd, 19~d~, Exhibit B was presented to the Council with a recommendation from the Manager that we hold in abeyance any action toward the City Farm, upon receipt of Exhibit A. ExD~ibi t C Mr. ~ S. Brent, Supervisor of Prisons, for the State of Virginia, the latter p~rt of March, 1943, made a report of the Jail Zo the Honorable Judge and the following recommenda -