Is there really a jail crisis in Lafayette Parish?

In a recent memorandum issued to the Lafayette Parish Sheriff’s Office staff, Sheriff Mark Garber indicates that the Lafayette Parish Correctional Center is “no longer capable of meeting the demands that are being placed upon it.” Is this true? And if so, what solutions are Sheriff Garber proposing to remedy the current situation? Join us as we explore this topic and its impact on the criminal justice system AGAIN.

Keeper of the Jail

Louisiana Revised Statute 15:704 provides:

“Each sheriff shall be the keeper of the public jail of his parish, and shall by all lawful means preserve the peace and apprehend all disturbers thereof, and other public offenders.”

For the most part, Garber correctly points out in his memo, “the Sheriff… has little control over the capacity of the jail, its population or the duration each inmate might be held within the jail.” But Garber either misunderstands, misinterprets, or deliberately minimizes his role under LARS 15:704 when he states: “The Sheriff, as “keeper” of the jail, is responsible for preserving peace and order within the jail.” Yes, the Sheriff is responsible for preserving the peace and order within the jail, but it is much bigger than that.

The Sheriff is accountable for preserving peace and order within the ENTIRE parish. That is why the statute also attaches the duty to “apprehend all disturbers… and other public offenders.” The Sheriff’s jail policies are critical to the safety of our parish because his failure to adequately manage existing jail space, book offenders, or otherwise incarcerate criminals has and will continue to have a direct impact on the safety of our entire community. More on that in a second.

Owner of the Jail

We haven’t had a new parish created in our state for over a hundred years, so we may lose sight of what the parish is responsible for in this new age of expansive government.

Louisiana Revised Statute 33:4715 provides:

“The police jury of each parish shall provide a good and sufficient court-house, with rooms for jurors, and a good and sufficient jail, at such place as they may deem most convenient for the parish at large, provided that when the seat of justice is established by law, they shall not have power to remove it.”

Not only is the parish responsible for building the jail, but they are also responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of the jail (LARS 15:702). This includes costs associated with the care of prisoners (LARS 15:705). These obligations on the parish were created in much different times. Times when it was inconceivable for a Sheriff to directly tax citizens to generate revenue to fund his office. Those times are gone, and most Sheriffs now have direct taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, or both. This change funds their ever-growing and expansive law enforcement operations, which have done little in recent decades to curtail actual crime rates in our state.

A Good and Sufficient Jail

What constitutes a good and sufficient jail? That topic can be debated for hours. Jails are constructed to aid staff (the Sheriff) in detaining prisoners. They are not a substitute for staff, nor are they supposed to be punishments in and of themselves. Confinement to a jail may be a judicial means of punishment. Aside from confinement, exposure to conditions within a jail should not be a means of punishment.

Nor should jails be Ritz-Carlton Hotels. Our legislature clearly recognized this years ago when they passed Louisiana Revised Statute 15:738, which provides:

“It is the intention of this legislature that, to the extent permitted by law, no inmate shall have a standard of living better than the state poverty level.  Citizens should not be worse off economically and living in conditions that are below those granted to inmates whose living standards are being paid for and subsidized by the hard-working and law-abiding people of the state of Louisiana.”

So, we should expect the conditions of jail to mimic those of people in poverty—nothing more. The fact that prisoners in our parish jail are provided with a roof over their heads, running water, linens, bedding, clothing, food, and medical care seems sufficient to the average person. The Sheriff disagrees.

In a recent e-mail sent by John Mowell, the Director of Public (and private) Affairs for the Lafayette Parish Sheriff, criticizing LCG Chief Administrative Officer Rachel Godeaux, he references: “…looming public safety issues caused by the lack of a good and sufficient space in the parish jail.” (Notice the inclusion of the word “space” following good and sufficient.) Mowell only references “space” as an issue, something that Sheriff Garber has manipulated over several years. That was on November 1, 2024.

Maintenance Issues

Then, on November 12, 2024, Garber provides a laundry list of “maintenance” issues. Many of these, he recognizes, have been repaired. It only points to one ongoing deficiency – the ratio of showers to prisoners. Garber states: “The LPCC is [in] violation of the American Correctional Association standard ALDF-4B-09. This standard requires one shower for every eight offenders.” LPCC is operating at one shower for every twenty-six offenders and requires a waiver during each accreditation period.”

This is nothing new. Garber fails to mention that the LPCC has never fully complied with the state health code or ACA standards pertaining to shower ratios. While twenty-six offenders may have to share a single shower, they are out of their cells for close to sixteen hours a day. ACA also only requires they have access to a shower once every seventy-two hours. Additionally, the ACA guidelines are not legally binding. The Sheriff voluntarily chooses to abide by them. So, what is the problem?

Operational Capacity

Garber also provides his version of history concerning capacity at the LPCC, which he claims has increased over the years and eventually arrived at the apex of 758. He fails to mention that the capacity for many years was 954, and during certain periods of emergencies, it was even higher.

This number included 200 beds in the annex facility, which the Sheriff himself closed down, knowing full well the impact it would have on our criminal justice system. Then, in yet another false statement, Garber indicates, “It is important to note the actual capacity of a jail facility is not dictated by the number of available beds. Capacity is instead governed by classification of the offenders being held within the facility at any given moment.”

Who stated previously, “The Sheriff has no control over jail capacity”? The Sheriff. Who is responsible for the classification of offenders? The Sheriff. Well, which one is it?

In Louisiana, every facility has an “operational capacity.” The State Fire Marshal and the State Health Officer determine this number. It is usually the same as the rated design capacity of the facility with additional expansion and doesn’t generally fluctuate. So, whether that number be 954 or 758, it is the number of prisoners that can be housed in the facility.

Functional capacity

What Garber is likely referencing is what is sometimes called “functional capacity.” This is where you may have 954 physical beds, but you cannot use a bed for some reason (i.e., broken door, stopped toilet, etc.). However, that doesn’t prevent the Sheriff from accepting the offenders up to the operational capacity established by the appropriate regulatory entities. This was standard practice under both Sheriff Breaux and Sheriff Neustrom. Prisoners who didn’t have the comfort of being provided with a private cell were housed in temporary bunks. This is yet another practice Sheriff Garber has eliminated at the expense of the safety of our communities.

Louisiana law even contemplates situations where a jail may be over capacity and dictates what the Sheriff is to do in those situations. Louisiana Revised Statute 15:764 provides:

“If the prisoner population of a parish jail exceeds the rated design capacity of the parish jail for seven consecutive days, the sheriff of that parish shall certify that fact in writing, by first class mail or personal delivery, to each district, municipal and traffic court judge in the parish, to the district attorney and the chief of police of any municipality within the parish, and to the senior official of the parish governing authority.  If this condition exists for seven consecutive days after notification of said officials, the sheriff shall declare a parish jail overcrowding state of emergency and shall notify such officials.”

If Garber truly believes we have a state of emergency at the LPCC, he should just follow the law and declare it, but he hasn’t! Why? Because the LPCC is not over capacity. It has “good and sufficient space.” Its capacity has been manipulated to advance other arguments to extort more money from the parish coffers. This becomes even clearer when you look at Garber’s list of solutions.

Garber’s Solutions

In the same memo, Garber sets out several solutions:

1. Long-term Solutions

• Build a new jail (additional cost to the Parish, zero cost or responsibility for the Sheriff)

Garber estimates the rated design capacity of the new jail would be 848 bunks. What? That is only ninety more beds than what Garber claims he now has, and it is still less than its historic capacity limits. How will that fix the “overcrowding” situation he claims to be experiencing? Additionally, let’s not forget that Garber claims capacity is “governed by the classification of offenders.” Apparently, he can now predict the classification of future offenders. His continuous contradictory statements simply don’t pass the smell test when compared with actual factual and historical evidence.

• Remodel the LPSO Annex (Although owned by the Sheriff, Garber proposes the project be funded entirely by the Parish)

This stinks as well. First, he wants the parish to make improvements to property they don’t own. Garber wants the parish to fund this while he allocates funds to build a fitness center. Although some may think this is well-intentioned, it clearly shows prioritization issues from the top law enforcement official in our parish.

Second, he claims the Annex is not fit to house anything other than minimum security prisoners. The Annex (the building attached to Lafayette Parish Correctional Center (LPCC), not the complex of Willow Street) has traditionally been used to house minimum and medium security prisoners. It was originally constructed and used for housing United States Marshal and Bureau of Prisons inmates, mostly illegal aliens. Is there another motive here? Is Garber posturing to cash in on what is likely expected to be a need for additional housing for illegal aliens, which is almost certain to increase once the Trump administration takes office?

Garber’s Expedient Solutions

2. Expedient Solutions

• Pay for out-of-parish overflow beds (Cost to the Parish)
• Enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement to lease the Annex (Cost to the Parish)

One interesting thing about this proposal is that the Sheriff, for years, has unjustly enriched himself by housing state prisoners at the LPCC. At one point, particularly in the Annex, the Sheriff collected money from the state but never shared that revenue with the parish, which largely covered the expenses associated with housing those prisoners. This is part of an ongoing lawsuit filed in October of 2019 by Sheriff Garber against Lafayette Consolidated Government during the Josh Guillory administration. That lawsuit remains in limbo: unresolved.

• Funding the GPS diversionary program (Cost to the Parish)
• Funding a Drug Rehabilitation Treatment Program (Cost to the Parish)

This is also very interesting. Programs such as these existed and were funded under the previous Sheriff but were eliminated or drastically cut after Sheriff Garber took office. Allegedly, they were cut because they were not cost-effective. However, these programs provided for the supervision of hundreds, if not thousands, of prisoners in settings outside the jail, helping to alleviate capacity issues at the parish jail. It is Garber’s own decisions that have led to his current “crisis.”

Garber’s “Systematic Solutions”

3. Systematic Solutions

• Clerk of Court – prioritizing minutes of incarcerated persons.
• District Attorney’s Office – shortening the time to file the bill of information.
• Indigent Defenders Office – increasing the contact and visits with offenders to speed up the likelihood of plea deals.
• Judiciary
  • Holding the District Attorney’s Office and Indigent Defender’s Officer accountable to case timelines.
  • Increase the number of criminal court days.

We found Garber’s criticism of the judiciary particularly interesting. You see, we have been monitoring a sampling of cases that appeared in our District Court for arraignment in January of 2023. That month, 548 felony cases were set for arraignment. As of today 34.12%, have resulted in pleas, 32.12% have been dismissed and 32.66% remain open prosecutions. A significant portion of those open prosecutions hasn’t’ moved forward, not because of the Judiciary, the District Attorney, the Clerk of Court, or even the Indigent Defenders’s Office. They haven’t moved forward because of the Sheriff.  Of the 179 open cases, at least 60.34% involve subjects with active warrants awaiting the Sheriff’s execution!

Remember when the Sheriff “temporarily” removed active warrants from his website around 2020? Well, they are still down. Perhaps there was an ulterior motive? Exactly how many outstanding warrants has the Sheriff failed to act on? We asked for the information, but the Chief Law Enforcement obstructionist in the parish, through his propaganda minister, instructed their taxpayer-paid attorney that the information is not a public record. It’s yet another lie from Sheriff Garber’s staff.

It Is All About Money!!!

This entire ordeal is being played out because of money. The Sheriff wants it, and LCG has more of it than he does. Garber’s resentment over not having the same financial access was made clear when he recently appeared on The Ross Report. In a conversation with Carol Ross, the Sheriff commented that when a Sheriff’s Deputy causes an injury, that cost comes from the Sheriff’s General Fund. However, when an LPD officer causes an injury, it doesn’t get paid from the LPD budget; rather, they have other “pots of money” to pay for the damage.

The Sheriff also wants the City to continue to pay his office over a million dollars annually so that the City can book “city prisoners” into the jail. This arrangement dates back several decades. The only problem is that the number of “city prisoners” entering the jail has steadily decreased. Just because the City Police arrest a prisoner doesn’t make them a “city prisoner.”

In yet another contradictory statement, the Sheriff has admitted that he is required to accept prisoners booked on felony charges. Yet, he has turned officers away from booking individuals arrested on felony charges. These are parish prisoners, regardless of whether the Lafayette Police Department, the Louisiana State Police, the ULL Police Department, the Youngsville Police Department, etc., arrest them. This is why all these agencies don’t have separate agreements to pay the Sheriff for booking their prisoners.

By Garber’s own policy, there are no “city prisoners.”

So why does the City of Lafayette pay the Sheriff for using LPCC? It is for housing City Prisoners. To be qualified as a “city prisoner,” a person must be subject to arrest or confinement for a misdemeanor offense in the City of Lafayette. Yet it has been LPCC policy dating back to Sheriff Neustrom not to book prisoners charged with misdemeanor offenses!

There may be people sentenced to serve time by a City Court Judge following conviction for a misdemeanor offense. However, Garber has made it clear he has no obligation to follow an order from a City Court Judge. It would be the same situation if a Magistrate in the City of Youngsville, Broussard, Scott, or Carencro were to sentence someone to serve time for an ordinance (misdemeanor) violation in their Mayor’s Courts. They have no jail to send them to, and the Sheriff is not obligated to book that prisoner into the Parish jail.

The City of Lafayette is likely not receiving adequate services for the level of compensation it is paying the Sheriff. The same thing happens whenever there are questions about why the City continues to pay money when it isn’t receiving fair services for the amount paid. Like Megan from the Walking Dead series, the Sheriff presents a baseball bat and swings it around. It is used to intimidate anyone challenging his position, but instead of being called “Lucille,” it goes by another name – LPCC. He will swing it at Judges, Council Members, and the Mayor-President. He will even break it over his knee in a temper tantrum, splintering the institution that protects law-abiding citizens from criminals. That is why you only hear about the jail problem in waves. When the hush money is paid, the theatrics dissipate.

Real Solutions

Our governor and legislators frequently talk about the areas where our state is an outlier and how improvements can be made at the state level. Many states act under what is referred to as a “county commission” model. In this arrangement, the county is typically responsible for taxation for all services in the country, whether jails, police, fire, schools, etc. All the money flows to a single source and is distributed as determined by the county officials. Of course, this model would face a lot of pushback from all the entities and officers who retain direct taxation power and autonomy, such as our Sheriff, Assessor, School Boards, etc.

But maybe there is a more straightforward solution to the constant bickering over who is responsible for parish jails. Maybe our legislature should explore transferring that responsibility from the parish directly to the Sheriff. Just think of all the issues this would address, such as another recent suit between the Sheriff and the Parish of St. Landry. Why would we continue to allow one government body to sue another over the vague phrase of “good and sufficient” when we could legislatively turn over control?

At that point, if the Sheriff felt the jail wasn’t good and sufficient, the only person he could point the finger at was himself. Not Parish Government, not the District Attorney, not the Judiciary, not the Clerk of Court, not the Indigent Defenders Officers, not the Governor or the Department of Corrections… He could just point his finger into a mirror.

Now seems like the perfect time for a legislative provision allowing the Sheriff of Lafayette to take on all the responsibilities associated with our parish jail. Do you think he would oppose such a measure?

###