Safe Streets – Strong Communities
1600 Oretha Castle Haley Blvd.
New Orleans, LA 70113
Phone :( 504) 522-3949
Fax: (504) 522-5430
www.safestreetsnola.org

Big Jails and Big Costs:

The Individual and Collective Costs of OverIncarceration in New Orleans

Voices from the People Most Impacted by Over-incarceration

November 2006

1

Introduction
For many years New Orleans has had the distinction of being both the city with
the highest murder rate in the United States1 and with the highest jail incarceration rate in
the world, incarcerating people at more than twice the rate of other cities of comparable
size.2 . A county jail is meant to serve primarily as pre-trial detention for those within the
jurisdiction considered flight risks or dangers to public safety. New Orleans, with the
average of 820 prisoners per 100,000 residents3 has the highest incarceration rate in the
world. At the same time, we are victimized by violence at an alarming rate. In the
summer of 2005, before the Hurricane interrupted the steadily climbing death toll, the
city’s crime rate was on the incline and the murder rates were back to being the nations’
worst. 4 After the hurricane, citizens became so concerned by a rash of murders that the
city ordered a juvenile curfew and invited supplemental policing from the National
Guard. 5 However, this massive jail system and high crime rates do not go hand in hand
as one assume. The vast majority of people behind bars in New Orleans are charged with
crimes like public drunk or spitting on the sidewalk. Sixty percent of people in the jail
were being held for misdemeanor offenses – making Orleans Parish Prison (OPP) a
multi-complex, small city of 3,000 – 8,000 used almost entirely for the warehousing of
low-level offenders.6

Although the practice of holding thousands of New Orleans residents in OPP for
misdemeanor offenses was not making the city any safer, it did come at great economic
cost. The cost of the parish jail has tripled in the last decade, rising from $22.5 million to
more than $75 million.7 With little transparency regarding the assets of the Office of the
Criminal Sheriff or how the $22.39 per diem per inmate was spent, the budget for the
Sheriff has nonetheless become one of the largest expenditures of the New Orleans city
budget. New Orleans taxpayers are the ones who foot the bill.
Though the majority of the city’s criminal justice infrastructure has been severely
disrupted by Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans has an opportunity to re-evaluate its public
safety priorities. Although a terrible tragedy for the city, the storm has provided an
opportunity to rebuild a system that is more effective at improving public safety, and to
save and redirect resources for greater efficiency and public safety. Yet, rather than look
towards an opportunity for cost-saving reform, the Sheriff’s Department appears to be
1

Adam Nossiter, “New Orleans Crime Swept Away, With Most of the People”, New York Times, November 10, 2005.
Wagner, Peter, Greenburg, and Kajstura in “Rebuilding a Safer New Orleans: Preliminary Research on what is
Possible” from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Census Bureau and calculations by the authors.

2

3

Wagner, et al
Adam Nossiter, New Orleans Crime Swept Away, with Most of the People, N.Y. TIMES, November 10,
2005 at A1.
5
Gordon Russell. We’re not Going to Take It Anymore’, Nagin Vows, TIMES PICAYUNE June 20, 2006
4

6

Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriff’s Office, Analysis of Daily Cost per Inmate, 2003-2006, attached to Letter from
Sheriff Marlin N. Gusman to Members of the New Orleans City Council, November 10, 2005.
7
Bruce Eggler and Frank Donze, “Thomas Residency Vote is Up in the Air”, New Orleans Times-Picayune, June 4,
2005.

2

moving towards the same failed criminal justice policies of the past. With less than half
the population of the city prior to the storm, the Sheriff’s Department 2007 Budget
Proposal requests an increase in funding8, and the Sheriff has publicly stated his desire to
rebuild OPP to 5,000 beds9 close to it’s disproportionate previous size. At a time when
the budget of the city is more constrained, the staggering cost to the city of this jail needs
to be more closely scrutinized than ever.
Though the majority of the city’s criminal justice infrastructure has been
severely disrupted by Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans has an opportunity to re-evaluate
its public safety priorities. Although a terrible tragedy for the city, the storm has provided
an opportunity to rebuild a system that is more effective at improving public safety, and
to save and redirect resources for greater efficiency and public safety. Yet, rather than
look towards an opportunity for cost-saving reform, the Sheriff’s Department appears to
be moving towards the same failed criminal justice policies of the past. With less than
half the population of the city prior to the storm, the Sheriff’s Department 2007 Budget
Proposal requests an increase in funding10, and the Sheriff has publicly stated his desire
to rebuild OPP to 5,000 beds11 close to it’s disproportionate previous size. At a time
when the budget of the city is more constrained, the staggering cost to the city of this jail
needs to be more closely scrutinized than ever.
In previous years, the New Orleans City Counsel has struggled to get answers on
what exactly the city was paying the sheriff’s office such exorbitant amounts for. When
then sheriff Charles Foti requested $25M from the city 10 years ago, his single line item
budget was no more detailed than the current proposed budget by the sheriff’s office12. At
that time, frustrated councilmember (including current Council President Oliver Thomas)
expressed reticence to pay the budget requested but felt their hands were tied by a 1990
Consent Decree resulting from a conditions lawsuit lodged by prisoners of Orleans
Parish. 13 Although that suit was meant to protect the rights of OPP inmates, it has
functioned as means to block reforms and institutional change. However, the financial
agreement that tied the city to paying a specific per diem and lump sum for medical
services expired in December of 2005. Further, that agreement has never precluded the
city from auditing the sheriff’s office, demanding performance standards, placing a cap
on the number of prisoners the city will pay to house, or establishing a formal and
binding contract with the Sheriff’s Office. Thus, because they are tasked with rebuilding
the entire justice system and are soon to be free of any previous agreements, New
Orleans’ City Counsel has a doubly unique opportunity to make more fiscally responsible
public safety decisions.

8

08.10.2006 letter to CAO City of New Orleans from Marlin N. Gusman, Sheriff.
Sheriff Marlin N. Gusman, quoted in “With Temporary Jail in Place, All Orleans Prisoners to Return” New Orleans Times-Picayune,
October 31, 2006.
10
08.10.2006 letter to CAO City of New Orleans from Marlin N. Gusman, Sheriff.
9

11
Sheriff Marlin N. Gusman, quoted in “With Temporary Jail in Place, All Orleans Prisoners to Return” New Orleans TimesPicayune, October 31, 2006.
12
Cooper, Christopher. Times Picayune 11.08.94 “FOTI'S ANSWERS ON FINANCES FALL FLAT WITH CITY COUNCIL”
13
ibid

3

Survey on Detention: A One Week “Snapshot” of People Under Control of the
Office of the Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriff:
In recognition of both the fiscal and social costs of continuing to fund Orleans
Parish Prison without a real assessment of how the money is spent and its need, Safe
Streets/Strong Communities sought to collect the information about the jail’s level of
functioning that has been so inaccessible in previous budget hearings. Based on a oneweek survey of people who are currently in jail or who have been recently released (this
research yields insight into the heretofore underreported realities of OPP. A formal
internal assessment of the Sheriff’s office would require open sharing of information
from the Sheriff’s Office, the only agency that really knows who’s in jail, for what, how
long and at what costs. Our study cannot be and is not intended to be a conclusive
assessment of the jail population. However, the survey results can provide an important
snapshot into who is currently under control of the Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriffs
Office and for what the $28 million budget request is about to be spent. We offer this
information as invaluable to the city as it continues the critical job of prioritizing our
scarce city dollars.
Methodology:
For a one-week between November 4 and November 11, 2006, Safe Streets/Strong
Communities surveyed people who are either currently being held prisoner by Orleans
Parish or who have been prisoners of Orleans Parish in the last ten months. Our surveys
were conducted primarily on the phone, as our office receives over one hundred phone
calls a week from people seeking basic information about their charges and upcoming
court dates. The remaining surveys were conducted during exit interviews with people
being released from OPP, and by phone interview to people who have been inside the jail
any time between January and November 2006. Our sample size was just over fifty.
The data we sought to gather is: 1) Who is in the jail and for what offenses 2) How
efficiently are people moving through the system and 3) What are the fiscal costs of
detention. Some information was supplemented by data made available on the website of
the Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriffs office, as well as other public data. However, it
should be noted that there is a glaring lack of transparency and information sharing
regarding the population held under the control of the Criminal Sheriff. Given the lack of
access to such information, our preliminary survey results in some ways provided the best
available lens into the current operations of Orleans Parish Prison.
Survey Findings:
The most notable findings of our survey, outlined in greater detail below, are:
•

This systems’ inefficiency and the large number of people in jail for low-level
offenses are costing a tremendous amount in taxpayer money. Time in jail also
has serious financial implications for the individuals detained, as well as their
family and loved ones.

4

•

Lack of communication between criminal justice departments like Probation and
Parole, other local law enforcement agencies and the court itself are keeping
people in the custody of the Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriffs Office for far longer
than is necessary. These are the result of system inefficiency at every stage of the
criminal justice system and a startling lack of information between different
criminal justice stakeholders. Yet there are also clear inefficiencies that the
Sheriff himself could resolve and that fall solely under his jurisdiction.

•

The majority of people in Orleans Parish Prison, and under the custody of the
Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriffs Office, are in there for non-violent,
misdemeanor and drug offenses, many of which could easily be addressed
through citation or a summons to appear in court.

More specifically, our survey found that:
Gross inefficiencies in the detention system cause people to both stay in jail longer
than necessary and to move through the system at an excessively slow pace.
Twenty percent (20%) of survey respondents did not receive a bond set within 72 hours
of their arrest. Despite the fact that it is mandated by law for people to receive a bond
hearing within three days of their arrest, 20% of survey respondents had exceeded the
time limit set by the law. Although 80% of arrestees in New Orleans qualify as ‘indigent’
and need a public defender, few people’s rights are protected at this stage of arrest
because their rights to counsel do not go into effect until 45-60 days after arrest.14
Eighteen percent (18%) of people interviewed had spent time in jail after their charges
were dismissed. After having charges dismissed, there is no reason for people to be held
for even one day – although survey respondents reported being held in detention for as
long as 36 days after having charges dismissed. While some people are being held due to
their Parole or Probation status, they too are being denied due process in the form of a
hearing to determine their Probation or Parole status.
25 percent (25%) of respondents had missed at least one appearance in court, meaning
that they were not able to reappear until weeks to months later. Sources inside the
criminal justice system tell us that the sheriff’s office has a policy of bringing only five
people to court each day and anecdotal evidence points to individual court appearances
being spaced an average of a month apart. This means that many people are missing court
dates because the sheriff’s office is not bringing those in their custody to court and when
they miss that court date, many have to languish in jail for another 30 days before their
next opportunity for an appearance. At the same time, inefficiencies in the jail and
failures of communication mean that people in jail are consistently missing court dates.
Of the 25% of respondents who had missed at least one court date, the average dates
14

Times Picayune, Feb. 11, 2006, “Public Defender Cases in Limbo”

5

missed was three. Safe Streets attempted to estimate the costs of incarcerating people.
Based on the Sheriff’s Office calculation of the number of people being held there, we
estimate that approximately 268415 prisoners are being held pre-trial in New Orleans on
November 13, 2006. Multiplied by the per diem amount of $22.39 for 30 days, we
calculated a monthly cost of $1,802,843.
These three findings have serious implications – both financially and regarding due
process rights. Financially, the cost to the city of additional time spent in jail adds up
significantly to the city, while the fact that people are being held beyond release date and
not having bond hearings in a timely manner is potentially illegal.
The large majority of people in custody of the Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriff’s
Office are being held for low-level, misdemeanor offenses and non-violent, drug
related charges.
Eighty percent (80%) of people surveyed were held on a non-violent offense. Of fifty
people interviewed in one week, only ten were being held on a violent offense, with the
remainder being held on misdemeanor, or drug and property charges.
Forty percent (40%) of respondents were held on a misdemeanor charge, a charge of
probation or parole violation, or because they owed fines and fees. Close to half of all
respondents in the snapshot sample were being held on misdemeanor offenses – including
public drunkenness, trespassing, first offense marijuana possession, or owing fines and
fees.
The costs of holding so many people in jail are staggering – to the individuals being
held, their families, and the city.
Of people being held on misdemeanor offenses and on failure to pay fines and fees, the
average amount that personal financial losses were reported was estimated at $4,300.
The median financial loss was estimated to be $1,800. People calculated this figure based
on their personal financial losses through loss of employment and wages, loss of housing,
and loss of government benefits / assistance. They also calculated the costs to their family
left behind such as money for collect calls, commissary food, toiletries and stamps and
even items such as linen.
A portion of the financial loss incurred by individuals during their incarceration is for
items that the Sheriff is paid by the city to provide. Close to a quarter of respondents
(24%) reported that their families had purchased linens and clothing for them during their
time in the custody of the Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriff. However, these are items that
the City pays the Sheriff to provide, and presumably should be included in the per-diem
costs. There is no reason for any family to send in critical items such as linens if the
citizens of New Orleans are paying the Sheriff to provide them.
15

From Sheriff’s Office Website http://stars400.opcso.org/pubsvr/IM1Q10AK.pgm calculated by author. NOTE:
calculations done by deducting the following categories from total: State Commitment, State Court Order, and Federal.
All other categories are presumably pre-trial offenders.

6

In just a small sampling of the population in jail from Orleans Parish, the financial impact
of such a large jail population is clear. For the individuals who are in the jail and their
families, incarceration carries a financial burden that for many can potentially drive them
deeper into poverty. For the city that is paying the per diem cost of their incarceration,
the financial costs are also significant. At the same time, the fact that families are
spending money on essential items that are already represented in the Sheriffs budget is a
sign of possible fiscal mismanagement, and should be a focus of further study.

For the individuals held in jail, there is a clear perception that financial gain for the
Sheriff is a significant factor in their incarceration. When asked the question of why the
incarceration rate is so much higher in New Orleans than in the rest of the nation,
responses revealed the general sentiment that people were being held in jail for low-level
offenses, with money being the incentive. “Trying to make money off of all of us”, “Its
all about the money”, “New Orleans thrives on incarceration – it’s a money thing” and
“They are stealing our lives for our money” are some of the many answers received.

Conclusion
The results of the preliminary snapshot reveal a jail system that is wasteful, inefficient,
and that is holding people for longer periods than is necessary, at great social and fiscal
cost to their communities and to the taxpayers of New Orleans. This is not a jail system
that improves public safety, but rather one that drains needed resources from the city, that
could be better spent on alternatives, diversionary programs, and investment into public
safety mechanisms with higher demonstrated success rates than detention. While the
results of this snapshot cannot be taken as a comprehensive study of the population under
custody of the Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriffs Office, nor of the full range of reforms
that could be implemented to improve efficiency, they do reveal both the need for further
assessment and some immediate steps that the city could take. By moving forward with
both short-term solutions and longer-term planning, the City of New Orleans could
immediately move towards reducing fiscal waste, ensuring that people do not continue to
be unnecessarily detained in the City of New Orleans, and focusing the use of its arrest
and detention powers on those who pose a risk to public safety.
Recommendations
Develop a formal contract between the Sheriff’s Department and the City of New
Orleans, that includes 1) an assessment of the efficiency of OPP operations and
recommendations for cost-saving reforms 2) an assessment of the necessary size,
scale and cost to operate an efficient jail in New Orleans and 3) regular audits of the
OPSCO budget and assets. There currently is no formal, written contract in existence
between the City and the Sheriff’s office which spells out exactly what services the
Sheriff will provide, what the terms of payment are, or that mandates accountability from
either the City or the Sheriff in its compliance. To ensure that the jail is operated
efficiently and without fiscal waste, such a contract should be established. It is the norm

7

for most if not all other services contracted out by the city, and there is no reason that the
Sheriff and the city shouldn’t come to a comparable agreement. The New Orleans can
and should exercise its power of the purse strings by tying funding to performance and
efficiency standards.
Invite in an independent expert who can conduct a full assessment of the current
OPP population and recommend means to improve the efficiency and operating of
the New Orleans detention system. This assessment would include 1) population
projections at the short, mid and long term range 2) the necessary jail capacity for the city
given these projections 3) an assessment of how to improve jail conditions and
programming and 4) what current inefficiencies exist in the system that cause inflation of
both the jail population and the cost of running the facility. There are national
organizations, such as the Vera Institute for Justice, which are more than equipped to
conduct such an assessment, with the full partnership of the Sheriff’s Department and the
City of New Orleans.
Implement reforms to decrease the number of people being held in OPP. As stated
in the report, 60% of OPP’s population before Hurricane Katrina was made up of
individuals held on attachments, traffic, or municipal charges, such as minor drug
possession, parking violations, and public drunkenness. None of these infractions present
a significant public safety risk and pre-trial diversion programs, bail reform, and cite and
release arrest policies are all examples of possible means by which the city of New
Orleans could save money and ensure public safety by reducing the population of people
in jail.
Ensure that the New Orleans Police Department fully implement the citation policy
for minor traffic violations and misdemeanors, regardless of prior arrest history or
police district. While there are numerous ways in which Sheriff Gusman could improve
efficiency of Orleans Parish Prison, it is a responsibility of every stakeholder in the
criminal justice system to also ensure that their practices are not needlessly wasting
taxpayer money with no return to public safety. To that end, with arrest rates being one
factor in the size of a jail population, Superintendent Warren Riley must issue and
enforce a policy of citing or issuing summonses for minor traffic and misdemeanor
offenses instead of arrests, which will save both jail space and city money. Detention in a
county jail should be based on the flight risk and level of danger to public safety.

8