Following weeks of delays, the federal court in Manhattan on Friday is scheduled to decide whether to appoint a federal receiver to take control of Rikers Island. While the city scrambles to retain oversight, predictions of what the court will decide diverge.The city is required to submit a final “action plan” for fixing the troubled Rikers Island jails complex to Judge Laura Taylor Swain on Friday. Judge Swain will then decide whether the fate of the island jails.The decision comes after weeks of delays in the wake of an extension granted by the court in May. The vice president of the New York County Lawyers Association, Richard Swanson, argues that more delays are likely.“Judge Swain’s decision is likely to be to continue to kick the can down the road to give the city and the Adams administration a chance to come up with a plan,” Mr. Swanson told the Sun. He added that he suspects that the court will “keep the adjournments relatively short to keep the pressure on” the city and the Department of Correction.A retired assistant deputy warden at Rikers Island who is an adjunct professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, Marc Bullaro, has a different view. He argues that the court will likely let the city retain control of the facilities.“I think that they will allow them to remain in charge … at this juncture because of what they have done,” Mr. Bullaro said.He pointed to the Department of Correction’s willingness to allow civilians to have a role in the oversight of Rikers; the unions supporting the DOC commissioner, Louis Molina; and the city showing some reduction in violence at the jails complex as “things I think the court will like.”Judge Swain’s decision could come a few days after the hearing, as she will have a number of developments to consider.Recent deaths on the island — there have been six so far this year — as well as considerations regarding the possible effectiveness of a receivership and obstacles to the city’s plan will all be factors.As the Sun has reported, many have come to the conclusion that a receivership is the only way that Rikers Island will be brought within the bounds of fulfilling its constitutional duties.Mr. Bullaro, for one, opposes receivership, arguing that it wouldn’t help solve the root causes of disorder on the island. He does, however, think that the court “would see a receivership as a way to do it faster — that’s in their mind. The end result though, is that I don’t think that the receivership will make the jails safe.”Mr. Swanson disagrees, arguing that Judge Swain understands that receivership would likely not be a quick solution to the chronic problems on the island.“Prison receiverships are difficult and time consuming and it’s not clear that a receivership would result in a faster solution to the problems at Rikers than a proper solution from the city with a plan to accomplish it,” he said.Despite disagreement on the speed and effectiveness with which a receiver would be able to remedy the violence and disorder at the island, Messrs. Bullaro and Swanson largely agree that the city has demonstrated the will to push the rules to address the problems.The city has said it plans to bring in civilians to help manage the Department of Correction and its facilities, which would be a legal gray area and possibly in violation of city rules and union contracts.The city has also been conducting searches for contraband, which, though necessary, create situations of potential conflict between detainees and officers.Although the city has demonstrated the will to make changes, there are reasons to be skeptical of its ability to execute on the plan to make Rikers Island a humane facility.A web of bureaucracy involving city rules, union contracts, and federal court orders dictate most everything that happens on the island, and it makes meaningful changes difficult.“The dynamic between the corrections department, the inmates, and the corrections officers union is complicated and difficult,” Mr. Swanson said. “On one hand the union legitimately fears for their safety, on the other hand any union that routinely has one third of their members absent on any given day isn’t working well,” he added. “And the inmates deserve to be safe, to be fed, and to have proper medical care as well.”Judge Swain will have to weigh all of these factors and decide whether the city or the federal court is in a better position to deliver safety to the inmates and officers and ensure that the facility operates according to the constitution.
