Opinion: A Rikers receiver must have the power to close it

For nearly a decade, a federal judge has been pushing to end abuse and violence in the jails on Rikers Island. With chronic staffing shortages, rampant violence and 32 deaths in custody during just the past two years, there is no question that Rikers is failing. It appears likely that Judge Laura Taylor Swain will soon take the dramatic step of appointing a federal receiver to oversee Rikers.

If the judge does choose to appoint a receiver, she will need to quickly decide the scope of the receiver’s powers, which could include control of the entire jail system and the authority to reallocate spending, renegotiate labor contracts, and override state and local jail regulations. While my organization, the Center for Justice Innovation, has taken no position on receivership, we have been adamant that Rikers most close – swiftly. It is critical that if a receiver is appointed, they are given the authority to take the steps necessary to close Rikers for good.

After decades of dysfunction, closing Rikers is the only way to permanently disrupt the cycle of violence and the culture of complacency that allows that violence to persist. Perhaps just as important, closing Rikers will provide a natural endpoint for the receivership and an opportunity for the city to take back control of its jails, foreclosing the prospect of endless federal oversight. 

My organization has helped support the two Rikers Commissions – the original one in 2017 that developed the plan to close Rikers and the current one, convened to update the original plan in light of COVID-19-related disruptions and ensure the closure plan is carried out as expeditiously as possible. The plan represents a pragmatic consensus built on years of research and reflection and incorporates the input of thousands of practitioners, crime survivors, people who were held on Rikers and those who worked there, families of those affected and everyday New Yorkers. If appointed, a federal receiver would need to help the city and state governments enact this plan -- and would require the authority to overcome many looming implementation challenges. 

Reducing the jail population is the most crucial step for the transition to smaller, borough-based jails. In the past two years, the jail population on Rikers has crept upward, largely due to increases in the proportion of people with serious mental illness and other behavioral health challenges, most of which could be safely addressed outside of a jail setting. But judges often say they lack sufficient alternatives to jail, such as residential beds for people with mental illness and substance use issues, transitional housing beds with adequate supervision and support, properly funded supportive housing facilities that would provide a path to long term stability and even semi-secure therapeutic housing. 

No one is better off after spending weeks or months on Rikers, but the truth is that after release most people return to their communities with no supervision or support at all. We need a continuum of dedicated housing options for people leaving jail that judges can use pretrial, from community-based care with robust treatment to care-first custodial settings that are run by clinical professionals alongside security personnel. A receiver would need the authority to ensure that the city and state work together to create these kinds of alternatives and overcome the NIMBYism and politics that often derails these projects. 

If appointed, a receiver should also be vested with the authority to reduce the population directly in certain circumstances. State law already authorizes the commissioner of the city Department of Correction to release individuals sentenced to one year or less in jail, but that law is underutilized despite evidence that early release under supervision is effective. During the COVID-19 pandemic, hundreds of people were safely released under community-based supervision, with high rates of compliance and few rearrests. A receiver could fully implement these early release options to provide an avenue for a supported and supervised transition back to the community.

Aligning the receiver’s authority with the closure of Rikers is also a way to ensure that federal control of the city’s jails does not continue indefinitely. Simply recreating Rikers’ violence and dysfunction in smaller jails is no solution. A receiver should be empowered to recalibrate the DOC’s staffing and operational plans, not just in the current jails but for the borough-based jails, too. The receiver should also be empowered to partner with community-based organizations that can seamlessly provide rehabilitation services in the jails and reentry services after release. The adoption of a safer, cost-efficient, rehabilitative staffing model would serve as a key indicator that the city is ready to take back control of its jails and end receivership. 

Whether a federal receiver takes over Rikers or not, the good news for the city and for Swain is that the path to ending violence on Rikers is the same as the path to ending receivership: closing Rikers once and for all.