Jackson County was supposed to vote on new jail standard. Why hasn’t it happened?
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Jackson County legislators again delayed a vote on Ordinance No. 6077.
- Forté objected to inclusion of potential civil actions and progressive discipline.
- Proponents seek reforms for hygiene, medical care, communication and complaint tracking.
Jackson County legislators have again postponed action on an ordinance aimed at improving living conditions in the county’s new detention center.
The measure has been delayed for months due to ongoing disputes between the Legislature and Jackson County Sheriff Darryl Forté over who has authority over the jail. This includes objections from Forté about provisions included in the ordinance that would create a grievance and accountability process.
“The inclusion of potential civil actions and progressive discipline in Ordinance No. 6077 is counterproductive to what I desire to accomplish,” Forté wrote in a May 11 email to legislators, adding that training and internal procedures fall under his authority as sheriff.
Often referred to by supporters as an “inmate bill of rights,” the proposal would improve hygiene, medical care, communication, safety and other conditions inside county detention facilities.
“These are not luxury complaints,” Jill Hanlin, with the Metro Organization for Racial and Economic Equity or MORE2, a Kansas City social action group that is pushing for the jail reforms, said in a statement.
“These are basic living conditions and necessities,” Hanlin said.
Under the ordinance, the county would ensure people in custody would receive hygiene supplies such as soap and menstrual products. It would also require the jail to have working phone and video systems so detainees can talk with attorneys and family members without repeated breakdowns or delays.
The ordinance also focuses on medical care, requiring timely responses when an inmate reports being sick and consistent access to prescribed medications. It would also set expectations for clean housing units and a process for documenting and fixing unsanitary or unsafe conditions.
It would require the county to track complaints and create a committee to review whether those basic conditions are being met inside the jail.
The ordinance was crafted after several meetings between legislators and community activists earlier this year.
“Our past jail sometimes produced new victims,” said Lora McDonald, executive director of MORE2. “We think a higher level of public safety means people leave the jail with access to help and a better understanding of how to be in the community.”
Inmates were transferred to the new Jackson County Detention Center, located off of U.S. 40 and Interstate 70, in early May. County officials promoted the $301 million jail as a modern replacement for the aging downtown detention center, which had long-faced allegations of overcrowding, abuse and mismanagement.
Following the move, reports of overcrowding and mechanical issues inside the new facility surfaced. After the relocation, reports emerged about overcrowding and mechanical problems inside the new facility. Inmates reported limited access to hygiene supplies and noted that loose wires were hanging from the ceiling due to unfinished visitation kiosks during the first few days of operation.
Defense attorneys said they had difficulty in contacting their clients.
Sheriff urges ‘no interference’
In a May 11 email to legislators, Forté said he objected to the ordinance and his immediate focus after inmates were moved to the new facility was on safety and security operations.
Forté said he “respectfully request(s) the opportunity to implement meaningful cultural change within the detention center without interference from the Legislature.”
Forté wrote that policies governing standards of care and inmate complaint procedures are already in place, along with processes outlined in the department’s collective bargaining agreement, and argued that several provisions in the ordinance duplicate existing frameworks.
He also objected to provisions requiring legislative reporting and disciplinary enforcement mechanisms, calling them “antithetical” to his management approach.
Forté said in his email that many elements of the proposed inmate bill of rights already exist in current policy and said there is “no established pattern or practice indicating mistreatment of inmates.”
He said that the detention center requires a “cohesive and proven system” and said the county should allow him to carry out the responsibilities he was elected to perform.
Jackson County Legislative Chair Manny Abarca, a co-sponsor of the ordinance, said last week that the delay in the ordinance was partly due to the full legislature being unable to meet over recent weeks. Abarca also said that he wanted to continue discussions with Forté, who requested time to review the proposal.
“I think the reality of the protections in place helps give the public a calm sense of reprieve that maybe they’re not getting in the current system,” Abarca said.
Abarca said that besides just codifying some of these issues, the ordinance shows the Legislature is listening to inmates and their families, particularly those who are in pre-trial detention who have not been convicted of a crime.
Supporters of the ordinance have pointed to those early issues as evidence that standards governing conditions inside the facility should be formally established and enforceable.
Advocates urged the Legislature to pass the ordinance after waiting for months and have long pushed for improved conditions inside the old facility.
Hanlin, whose son is currently being held at the jail, said advocates have urged county leaders to move more quickly despite some improvements inside the facility.
“Since February, advocates, family members and community stakeholders have been presenting Jackson County legislators with a simple and reasonable request: adopt and enforce a true bill of rights for those housed in the new Jackson County detention center,” she said.
After lawmakers again tabled the ordinance, Jackson County Executive Phil LeVota said he wanted to speak directly with Forté before deciding how to move forward and determine whether the sheriff wants changes to the proposal.
LeVota said legislators have continued hearing concerns from constituents about conditions inside the detention center but acknowledged that the sheriff is still working on the transition into the new facility.
“You heard your constituents talking to you about what’s going on,” LeVota said. “That’s frustrating. I do understand the sheriff is trying to get things up and running, but I do understand he knows he does owe an obligation to this body.
