We would be happy to talk in depth about this problem. I think it is not only the future of this city but of all cities that is at stake. They are going to get systems like this or else we are just going to be following the proverbial dogtail around in a circle with little programs here and a little program there-we invent new names for them, but they are the same thing. And we have to stop doing it.

Senator BAYH. This does apply to the Nation. You and I have the specific joint responsibility for the Nation's capital, and thus, I think, we might be able to provide an example. And I am looking at certain Presidential vetoes in this area. Let me say that I do not think we ought to get the Federal Government involved in making family decisions and family plans where family decisions and family plans are existent. But, I know and you know that there are hundredsthousands of youngsters who do not live in that kind of environment, and without pursuing this at any great length, I hope that we can discuss personally and at the staff level, publicly and privately, not just the quantitative approach of how many young children we are giving a part-time treatment but how many young human beings we are providing the opportunity to develop ultimately into productive and competent adults.

Now, perhaps, I should not have expanded on that, but I know of your interest, and I just wanted to alert you and other staff members that are here of my profound interest in that area.

Mayor WASHINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I welcome your intervention and the interjection of some consideration like this. It is not often that we get a chance to submit some philosophical background to what seems to be an academic exercise. In the budget, you have got figures and a justification. Behind that, I think the more we can discuss the programs, the closer we will come to mutual understanding. I think it is a healthy approach.

NO. 1 PRIORITY FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT

Senator BAYH. Well, we all talk about priorities, and I do not know how many speeches I have made in the last week, but I am sure that in almost every one of them I have talked about priorities. And if there needs to be advanced warning or notice, consider this discussion to be the notice: This is where I put No. 1 priority.

Mayor WASHINGTON. I have made a speech or two this week, too, Mr. Chairman. I do not know whether or not they have even been appreciated. Most of them have been before the Congress.

We have before us the 1973 supplemental funding request, allowing us to maintain services which we think are crucial. One of those services, of course, is an item of great concern to you and to me: the new detention center. We have with us here staff from the Department of Corrections and a representative from an architectural firm. We have brought in an exhibit of the proposed center. We will be able to talk later in a good bit of detail about what we are doing there. Basically, because of its age and rigid design, the existing District of Columbia jail presents many problems for the Department of Corrections in the proper handling of persons between arrest and case disposition. To overcome those problems, we are requesting funds to start construction of a new facility.

The foundation and core service facilities of the planned detention center will support up to 1,500 detainees, but our present plan is to build for 1,000. With the modular design of the housing units, we will be able to expand the facility to house 1,250 or 1,500 detainees if the need arises.

DIFFICULTY IN PROJECTING POPULATION

The problem of projecting population for correctional facilities have surfaced in our planning for the detention center.

We have some charts, Mr. Chairman, that will show you the difficulty that I have reported to you in a document concerning the District of Columbia jail and the Lorton correctional complex. I think that just a quick look at the chart shows the erratic nature of the population trends. We have also reproduced that chart on paper.

[The information follows:]

PROVISION OF SPEEDY TRIALS

Mayor WASHINGTON. The projection of population trends has been difficult. With the work of units in the Corrections Department and the Office of Criminal Justice Plans and Analysis and the cooperation of the General Accounting Office, we have come to believe that 1,000 persons will need to be accommodated in the facility. There is a little tension in the Corrections Department, however, because population is starting back up again. We do not know how sharp the growth will be during January and February and March; it appears to be on its way up again. We are analyzing the data.

We will get into this in as much detail as you want. We believe the greatest influence on population has been the provision of speedy trial. Detainees had to wait 18 to 24 months for a trial during the period when we made our initial projections for the new jail. Population was running 1,100 to 1,200 at that time-nearly double the capacity of the facility. As soon as the court reform really took hold and 14 judges were added to the system, the time of waiting for trial decreased. There was relatively a sharp decline in population, as you see here. Population of the jail is now around 740 or 750 persons on average, still some 100 or so persons over the capacity.

Senator BAYH. Then, you feel that the speedy-trial provision is primarily what brought the rate down?

Mayor WASHINGTON. From what we can see. We see several factors, but I think the most important factor was speedy trials. The waiting period is now down to 2 or 3 months.

SHORT-TERM INCREASE IN JAIL POPULATION

Senator BAYH. Do you have any preliminary facts about why you had the short-term increase there around the first of the year?

Mayor WASHINGTON. We are looking at that trend; I think the corrections officials may wish to speak to that. They are a little touchy about it because it has held for 2 months. There are several factors involved. I want to let them give you the detail on the increase. The speed up of trials, the new sentencing patterns, the increased use of probation, the activity of the Bail Reform Act-those factors are having some effect. The question is: Which one has the greatest impact? At this point, we think speedy trials as the prime factor. We have some drawings and some of the models that will indicate how we are able to maintain the population at 1,000 without giving up any supportive services: recreation, dining facilities, and so forth. We can give you a fairly detailed presentation along that line.

POPULATION TRENDS FOR THE JAIL

The average daily population of the District of Columbia jail grew to 1.000 or 1.100 in fiscal 1971 and to 1.175 in fiscal 1972. Then, it started to drop until, by January of 1973, the average daily population was 723. In February, it rose slightly to 749. Apparently in March it maintained the upward trend.

In view of these population swings, we believe that building a facility to house 1,000 detainees initially is realistic and prudent.

91-414 O 73 pt. 2 16