Tuesday was a tough day to be a county sheriff in Idaho.

Ballot measures to build new jails or expand existing lockups failed in Jerome, Canyon and Kootenai counties. In Jerome and Canyon counties, voters will almost certainly be asked the same questions next May. Kootenai authorities, who face expiration of local-option tax authority, are unsure of their next step.

It's not that sheriffs and commissioners have much choice. In Canyon County, officials struck a consent agreement with the American Civil Liberties Union after the group sued earlier this year because of jail overcrowding. That's temporary, though. Only a new jail will make the ACLU go away.

On Tuesday, 57 percent of voters said yes to a $46 million bond issue; short of the required two-thirds approval.

In Coeur d'Alene, Kootenai County officials will continue to ship inmates elsewhere - to the tune of about $5 million a year. Voters declined to raise sales taxes a half-cent to expand the present jail.

And in Jerome, a proposed 30-year lease-purchase of a new $13.5 million jail fell two dozen votes short. The dilapidated 35-year-old stockade's closure is just a question of when.

Taxpayers nowhere in Idaho want anything to do with paying for new jails, but these three counties' alternatives are limited. In fact, Jerome and Canyon counties' only realistic short-term option is the same as Kootenai's - pay somebody else to house prisoners.

We supported the Jerome County jail enterprise, although we would have preferred a bond issue, even if the immediate cost to taxpayers were higher. And we believed then, as we do now, that a multi-county regional jail is a better idea.

The commissioners should consider both alternatives again before a second vote, but however a new jail is paid for, Jerome County is simply running out of time.

It can't afford - as Gem County did - to run eight jail bond issue proposals before one finally passes.

The closure of the current Jerome lockup - either by insurers refusing to cover the risk or by an ACLU lawsuit - without a replacement would be the worst and most expensive contingency for the county's taxpayers.