Details Vague on Spending from San Diego Jail Detainee Welfare Fund
The commissary operated in San Diego County jails collected enough revenue from detainee purchases to pump up the balance in its Incarcerated Persons’ Welfare Fund (IPWF) to $11.1 million by June 30, 2024. But the office of Sheriff Kelly A. Martinez provided few details about fund spending, which state Penal Code § 4025e says “shall be used solely for the benefit and welfare of” those incarcerated.
Rather, county commissioners received a one-page report announcing that $5.7 million was spent from the fund in the previous fiscal year. An accompanying pie chart noted that 75% went to educational programs, without providing any specifics. Bus passes and other goods and services for indigent detainees consumed another 11% of that total. About $700,000 more went to cover supplies, operations, equipment and other services. In years past, this included vehicle fuel and maintenance, as well as employee cellphones and even out-of-county travel. But again, no detail was provided. The report showed that the lion’s share of IPWF spending—75%—went to “educational services,” which the law allows the Sheriff to use for salaries of employees who provide them. But again, no details were provided.
County resident Paul Henkin complained in an email, “To call an annotated pie chart an itemized report as called for in Penal Code 4025e is a bit of a stretch.”
Nick Shepack, Nevada Director for the nonprofit Fines and Fees Justice Center, said that the language of the law “allows for what we are seeing in San Diego to be very common,” with IPWF raided “to pay visitation staff or anyone working in the commissary.”
San Diego County’s IPWF has also paid for detainee phone calls, since commissioners voted to make them free in 2021. A grand jury convened to examine evidence of fund mismanagement recommended on June 1, 2023, that the Incarcerated Person’s Welfare Committee, which oversees the fund, “[c]reate and maintain ongoing detailed multiyear spending plans” as well as requiring those in “positions funded in whole or in part by the IPWF” to complete “periodic time studies to avoid overcharges to the fund.” See: Incarcerated Person’s Welfare Fund, San Diego Cty. Grand Jury Report (2023).
In its response on July 25, 2023, the Sheriff’s Department largely disagreed with the grand jury findings and refused to implement its recommendations. The lack of transparency about how money collected from detainees is spent is one way to avoid criticism, of course. As PLN reported, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office was harshly chastised in 2021 when it came to light that its IPWF had been raided to pay for employee trips and salaries as well as expenses, including parking lot improvements. [See: PLN, Oct. 2021, p.40.]
Additional source: San Diego Union-Tribune
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login