The Barry County Board of Commissioners has officially unveiled its Jail Stakeholders Committee. Stakeholders, of course, meaning judges, prosecutors, cops, consultants, and yes, even public defenders.
Basically everyone except the actual public, the people who foot the bill for this “public safety facility.”
No citizens at large. No community voices. Just the people who cash checks, hand out sentences, and pad their résumés.
The Lineup
- Judge Michael Schipper, because why wouldn’t we let the guy who regularly sentences people to the jail also have a hand in building it?
- Prosecutors and Police Chiefs, the more people they funnel in, the more “need” they can argue for a bigger, pricier jail.
- Public Defenders, the very people meant to safeguard defendants’ rights are now sitting at the table where cages are planned. That’s not “zealous defense”….that’s conflict of interest and the zealous lining of pockets.
- Consultants and Designers, folks who will bill the county for “visioning sessions” and “correctional design strategy.”
- County Commissioners, apparently too busy appointing themselves to listen to the east side of the county, which, according to locals, has virtually no representation.
The only thing missing? A ribbon-cutting ceremony with golden handcuffs.
Conflicts Everywhere, Accountability Nowhere
Let’s call this what it is: a closed loop of self-interest, otherwise known as a self-licking ice cream cone.
- Judges sentence.
- Prosecutors charge.
- Public defenders “participate.”
- Police arrest.
- Consultants design.
- Commissioners approve.
Every single one of them profits, politically, financially, or both, when more people end up behind bars.
Kellie Smith’s daughter is actually the same person who said that “jails and prisons are like hotels.” Perhaps she should talk to her mother and tell her that a new jail shouldn’t be built; it’s apparently “nice” enough.
But where are the voices of families who’ve seen loved ones swallowed by the system? Where are the community members footing the tax bill? Nowhere near the table.
The Ethical Landscape
1. The Judicial Perspective (The Judge)
For a judge, the primary concern is impartiality (or even the appearance of partiality). Most judicial codes of conduct (like the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct) require judges to avoid any activity that would lead a reasonable person to question their independence.
- The “Vested Interest” Problem: If a judge helps build a jail, they may appear to have a professional or personal stake in its “success” or occupancy.
- Conflict of Interest: If a defendant challenges the conditions of that specific jail, the judge who oversaw its construction would likely have to recuse themselves, as they are essentially a defendant in the “court of public opinion” regarding the facility’s design.
- Separation of Powers: Judges belong to the judicial branch; building a jail is an executive/administrative function. Crossing this line can blur the constitutional boundaries intended to keep the court neutral.
2. The Prosecutorial Perspective (The Prosecutor)
While Prosecutors are advocates for the state, they are also “ministers of justice.”
- The Neutrality Gap: A prosecutor’s job is to determine who goes to jail. If they are also tasked with managing the budget and capacity of that jail, there is a risk that their charging decisions could be influenced by “filling beds” or, conversely, managing costs.
- Public Trust: It creates a perception that the prosecution and the facility management are “one and the same,” which can undermine the rights of the accused.
3. The “Team” Perception
The biggest ethical hurdle is the appearance of collusion. If a Judge and Prosecutor are sitting together on a board:
- The “Inside Baseball” Effect: It suggests a level of “chumminess” that can be intimidating to defense attorneys and defendants.
- Pre-judgement: It may look as though the court and the state have already decided that incarceration is the primary solution for the county, potentially biasing the judge against alternative sentencing or rehabilitation programs.
Summary of Ethical Risks
| Stakeholder | Key Ethical Risk |
| The Judge | Violation of Canon 1 (Independence and Integrity) and Canon 2 (Avoiding Impropriety). |
| The Prosecutor | Conflict of interest between public safety and facility administration. |
| The Public | Loss of faith in the “neutrality” of the courtroom. |
| The Defendant | Potential violation of the 14th Amendment (Due Process). |
The Bigger Picture
This isn’t just bad optics. It’s a structural conflict of interest. When the very people who benefit from incarceration are tasked with designing the next jail, you don’t get oversight; you get a sales pitch. And the public is expected to pick up the tab. The County Board of Commissioners routinely deny access to mental health resources, the very thing that could reduce the jail population on purpose.
Why? Because they want to build a brand new jail, keep it full, and maintain their pay-to-stay jail scheme to keep it and their pockets full. They also take in substantial money from housing individuals wanted for federal cases, such as those arrested by ICE.
Several of the people on the Board of Commissioners are business men who often employ builders, and recently were busted for trying to rehab a building that would cost the county thousands…and put money right back into their pockets.
Mike Callton, former senate candidate, also took in campaign funds from energy PACs, builders, realtors… all benefiting from a building boom in the Barry County area because the Grand Rapids area is in the middle of a housing crisis.
Find his Senate Campaign information here.
Barry County deserves better than a self-dealing committee. The people deserve transparency, representation, and a system where the people most affected by mass incarceration actually have a say in how taxpayer money gets spent.
But hey, at least the jail board members won’t have to worry about overcrowding. They’ve already reserved their seats at the table.
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
