Jail questions, asked and answered

You probably wonder if I will ever give up. Ten months I have been closely following the jail project, since last July 18th when the jail planning meeting minutes record suggestions offered by me and others to the jail committee to improve their plan. Looking back, those suggestions were set aside as it is now evident they already had a plan in place, and our suggestions didn't fit with their plan. If you take the time to read my entire commentary, I think you will understand and appreciate better just how this project has evolved, and understand the depth of my frustration with our county government leadership.

There are three major reasons, in no particular priority, why I will not give up.

First, the commissioners currently plan to take the daily cost of keeping a prisoner from $82 per day in 2011, to an estimated $230 per day in 2013. The $230 daily prisoner cost is the sum of $137 for jail operating expense and $93 for a jail bond payment. This is based on the ten year average daily prisoner count of 10, and the population is stable over that period.

When you add the sheriff's office expense to the jail expense, the annual obligation of the taxpayer for county law enforcement expense will rise from a total of $636,000 in the year ending June 30, 2011, to an estimated $1,200,000 in the first full year of the new LEC operation. That $1,200,000 will rise with the inflation rate and continue until the $340,000 annual bond payment portion of it is retired in 20 years.

I assume now you might be skeptical? These are not numbers I have imagined, these are the county's own numbers obtained from the official Red Willow County 2011 audit, the 2012 budget, and the Prochaska & Associates Jail Study dated 9/8/2011.

You can play with the numbers if you wish, adjust the daily prisoner count, include more or less operating expense, but the general cost relationships do not change much. I have presented proposals to the commissioners that have the potential to reduce the cost, but they dismissed them and forged ahead with their original plan.

Second, the jail proposed on Norris Avenue will probably be there for the better part of forever. We are building over a 15,000 square foot building with a larger footprint than the courthouse. There is no room or practical option to expand the jail building in the future to achieve efficient cost economies of scale other than adding a second or third story. I think that would be a prohibitively expensive expansion, unsuitable for the Norris Avenue location, and nearly everyone I have talked to about this idea whether for or against the current plan initially, agrees with me.

Third, we have a unique architectural, historical, cultural, and business neighborhood experience along Norris Avenue. Rarely are there places in Nebraska that have this collective circumstance. The community value of our businesses, theaters, churches, parks, historical public buildings, homes of state and nationally significant men, and the only Frank Lloyd Wright designed home in Nebraska should not be discounted nor understated.

My involvement in this issue has been much longer than the 18 months I noted above. It goes back to 1997 and my continuous service on the McCook Planning Commission, many years as the chairman.

In late December of 1997, the planning commission made adjustments to the city zoning regulations in anticipation of a large prison that might come to town. I was a part of that discussion, and it included discussion of the future need of a county jail. We reviewed the comprehensive plan and adjusted the zoning policy that is still in effect today permitting jail placement.

Fast forward 15 years to today and the challenges we face as a community over the county commissioner's jail decisions. I have been studying this for a long time and offer the following questions, asked and answered, from my point of view.

I have written this to minimize speculation and opinion, and base my essay on independently verifiable information from the county record of commissioner meeting minutes, jail planning committee minutes, jail studies, printed material provided by the county or available online at the county website, and a number of archived McCook Daily Gazette articles online which provides excerpts and quotes.

November 2006 How did the commissioners feel about the first LEC vote failure?

The following are excerpts from an article in the McCook Daily Gazette November 14, 2006, where the commissioners are discussing the failure of the November 7, 2006 public safety center vote.

{ {Downer said he was disappointed in the results of the election. "It would have been negligent of us not to have offered the question as a ballot issue," he said. With the magnitude of the decision before the county, "we felt it needed to be voted upon."

Although Downer said it was unfortunate that the county did not have a specific location in mind -- or at least not the public's favorite location in hand -- McNutt felt that negative input from two city department heads and one city council member were more harmful to the cause.

McNutt said he was disappointed in what he saw as unprofessional conduct by two city department heads -- McCook Police Chief Ike Brown and McCook Fire Chief Marc Harpham -- and city council member Phil Lyons, "who took such a strong stand against the projects."

After the city council voted to put the ballot questions before the public, McNutt said, these three men -- two of whom, Brown and Harpham, served as members of the county's initial jail task force and then on the city-county jail committee-- "should not have promoted the downfall of the project."

McNutt said, "I think (the bond issue) could have succeeded without the negative involvement."

McNutt said he will talk with Reuben Hoff Jr., the jail task force chairman, and task force members to see if the task force should be disbanded or if members want to be involved in whatever comes next. "Time will tell," McNutt said. "Obviously, the negative people on the project are not who we want on a committee."} }

May 2010 Did the City ever offer to work with the county on a joint facility?

The county record of minutes of the May 10, 2010 meeting state that Commissioner McNutt reported he had received an email from McCook Mayor Dennis Berry inviting the county to participate with the city to construct a Law Enforcement Center. After a brief discussion, Commissioner Downer made a motion to decline participation in a joint facility. McNutt seconded the motion. The vote was passed 2-1 with Commissioner Hoyt voting no saying he "thought it was premature to make a decision without visiting with the city on the issue".

When questioned about this during the March 12, 2012 regular commissioner meeting, Commissioner McNutt explained that "he did not feel that an email from a council member was an official invitation".

I offer these two questions. 1.) If Commissioner McNutt didn't consider Mayor Berry's email invitation an "official action", why did the commissioners feel the need to take "official action" and vote to decline the invitation at this meeting? 2.) If either Commissioners Downer or McNutt, or both, had voted with Commissioner Hoyt to visit with the city, would we be in this predicament today?

April 2011 Did the jail study committee offer an independent and objective analysis of jail need?

The county record minutes of the April 18, 2011 meeting announced the appointment of the jail study committee members. They were Reuben Hoff Jr., Nancy Willers, Jim Coady, Mitch Lyster, Jim Ladd, James Arp, Donnie Sughroue, Michelle O'Dea and Pam Morello.

This was the first indication to me that there could be potentially serious problems with this project planning. I have no reason to believe that these are anything other than fine quality individuals with a passion to serve and support good government. My concern was about the views that might not be represented on the committee.

There was no representative included from the city, public safety, downtown retail merchants, Chamber of Commerce, Keystone Business Center, High Plains Museum, Fox Theater, public schools, immediate neighborhood residents, Episcopal & Methodist churches, the Frank Lloyd Wright designed "Sutton House", and the Heritage Square project including the Nelson & Norris homes. These are all important assets to McCook and deserve at least some voice in a project that is going to significantly impact their neighborhood.

Furthermore, it appears that 50% or more of the committee members live outside of the city of McCook. Not terribly alarming, but do realize that 70% of the county population and 70% of the county households are within the city of McCook.

The jail planning committee minutes of May 11, 2011 record the first meeting and organization of the committee. All nine committee members were there along with three county commissioners, the county clerk, the sheriff and two additional sheriff office staff, and Steven Riley and Scott Lundberg from Prochaska and Associates, the engineering and design firm hired to develop the project.

County Commissioner Chairman McNutt agreed to chair the jail planning committee. The minute's record that he advised the committee that the task before them was to help select the most feasible option and assist the commissioners in educating county residents of the need for a jail. It was noted in the minutes that "you cannot overeducate the public".

Steven Riley (PA) questioned committee members on their expectations of the planning process. He further explained the project schedule and feasibility study process. He also explained that they had reduced the planning process to five options: 1.) Build a jail connected or adjacent to the courthouse. 2.) Remodel existing Sheriff's office/jail into code compliance. 3.) Remodel existing city facilities into code compliance. 4.) Build a jail at a new "green field" location. 5.) Continue status quo by developing a compliant "hold and transport" facility.

Steven Riley (PA) further announced that since they were ahead in developing project options, he would go ahead and review the site plan and floor plan for Option One, the jail next to the courthouse. He then proceeded to present thirteen bullet points relating the design features of this option in detail. Long story short, this was the plan that was decided upon.

This was all presented at the FIRST meeting of the jail planning committee and is recorded in the minutes.

It is my speculative opinion the other four options did not receive sufficient consideration and stand much of a chance of development. It appears to me that the commissioners and sheriff, along with Prochaska and Associates, had already decided in advance of the first jail planning committee meeting what they wanted in the new facility and where it would be.

Bottom line, my principle concern was that the jail study members appointed did not represent a reasonable cross section of county residents and as a result, they could not objectively offer diverse opinion and analysis of the project. This had a significantly detrimental effect to a fair evaluation of the project and their final recommendation.

Remember Commissioner McNutt's comments in the Gazette from November 14, 2006. { {"Time will tell," McNutt said. "Obviously, the negative people on the project are not who we want on a committee."} }

April 2008 What does the Norris Avenue site cost?

The county real estate property record indicates the properties north of the courthouse were purchased by the county commissioners on the following timeline.

4/12/2008. 516 Norris was purchased for $79,500. Plans at that time were indefinite, but suggestions at the time included parking and/or future county office space.

2/23/2010. 524 Norris was purchased for $50,000.

12/27/2010. Gerald Maris Construction was awarded the bid to demolish one of the buildings at 524 Norris for $24,500.

3/1/2012. 520 Norris was purchased for $160,000. This amount was $60,000 above a professional appraiser's estimate value of $100,000.

The county now owns all the property north of the courthouse measuring approximately ¾ of an acre total. There are four remaining structures on those properties and based on the 524 Norris demolition costs, I am going to suggest an estimate range of $50,000 to $100,000 to clear remaining structures to have a clear property to develop. For summation sake, I will use an estimate of $75,000 to demolish the four buildings.

That brings the total estimated projected cost for this ¾ acre site to $389,000. To better understand the impact of the cost of this site, this amount is mathematically equivalent to about $520,000 per acre for land ready for development.

By comparison, the 8 acre "green site" identified adjacent to the Work Ethic Camp is estimated to cost in the neighborhood of $5,000 to $7,500 per acre for a total investment of $40,000 to $60,000. That is 10% to 15 % of what the county will have invested in the Norris Avenue location with the land leveled and ready for new construction.

October 2010 Is the proposed Norris - courthouse jail location violating McCook zoning ordinances?

The county commissioner minutes of October 25, 2010 meeting read that Commissioner McNutt advised the other commissioners that the property north of the courthouse is not zoned for a jail, after conferring with the city planning commission on October 11, 2010.

Locating a new jail next to the courthouse is not permitted by zoning regulations, so the proposed project is technically violating the zoning ordinances of the City of McCook. A review of court case history by County Attorney Paul Wood led him to offer an opinion to the commissioners that the county would not have to abide by those zoning ordinances. This is an opinion based on the result of other similar court decisions, not statutory authority. The unanswered questions then became: Are those court cases exactly like the situation in McCook? Is the city willing to challenge the county attorney's opinion in court to enforce its zoning ordinances?

About a year later, this information appeared in the Gazette.

McCook Gazette 9/27/2011

{ {Building a jail without an election or despite objections by (the city's) planning committee and city council, "will cause hard feelings," Dueland said. Recall is often seen as the only recourse if citizens feel backed into a corner, he said.

McNutt said at the jail study committee meeting Sept. 21 that legally, the county would not have to request or have permission from the city's planning committee to build a jail in what is currently a residential area. "But, out of respect, yes, we'll go to the planning committee," McNutt said. "We have no intention of hiding anything from anyone."} }

Incidentally, Commissioner McNutt never voluntarily presented the issue of the courthouse jail location to the planning commission, but did finally appear 3/12/2012, after receiving a letter from the city planning commission requesting him to appear and discuss jail plans.

February 2011 How big a jail do we need?

A report we obtained independently from the State of Nebraska Crime Commission Statistical Analysis Center gave us the jail population figures for the last ten years, 2002-2011, for Red Willow, Frontier, and Hitchcock Counties. According to Sheriff Mahon, we rent beds and keep prisoners regularly in these counties and occasionally in Decatur County, KS. It is my understanding that we use the Oberlin jail minimally and I don't have numbers collected for them.

The 10 year (2002-2011) average daily prisoner population for Red Willow County is around 10. If you look at the yearly average ranges from the high to the low, they are remarkably flat and show little change over the ten year period.

In the minutes of the July 18, 2011 Jail Planning Committee meeting, member Nancy Willers asked Sheriff Mahon how many prisoners he deals with on a daily basis. He replied it ranged from 8-15, and he had 10 on that day. Sheriff Mahon's number is consistent with the report we obtained from the State of Nebraska Jail Statistics.

The average lengths of stay numbers are basically flat as well over the same 10 year reporting period, but are different between counties. From 2002-2011, the length of stay average was Red Willow 9.5 days, Frontier 23.0 days, and Hitchcock 12.5 days.

The 2005 Allied Corrections Services study revealed some other interesting information. It concurred with the Nebraska Jail Statistics Red Willow County numbers estimating a 5 year average daily population of 11 and average length of stay of 10.5 days. It also said in a study of the prisoners admitted to jail in 2004, 20% were released within 12 hours, 30% were released within 24 hours, and 62% were released within 72 hours.

I think we might all agree our 96 hour jail at the city safety center is too small, antiquated and obsolete. I too think we need a new facility of some type, but the question becomes: How many extra beds do we need now? Another way to look at this would be; if we have extra beds, would the sheriff work hard to fill them?

An article published in the North Platte Telegraph about their new jail on February 14, 2012 reported that general prisoner population rose from 80 on opening day to a six month average of 109, and female population rose from 10% to 25% of the prisoner population. Among reasons cited by Sheriff Jerome Kramer were that officers were more inclined now to arrest rather than cite (ticket) female offenders as now they know they have more space in the jail, as well as tougher sentences for women in the courts.

February 2011 What will it cost to construct the jail?

The county minutes of February 7, 2011 record a visit from Don Evans and Chris Hatfield from the Jail Standards Division of the NE Commission on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice.

Evans talked to the commissioners about cost and generally stated that it cost about $100,000 per bed to build a jail only. He stated that no laws prevent the county from using the city 96 hour facilities if they would choose to do so. He also offered no guarantee that it would meet jail standards in the future if a federal court ordered changes. He added that he didn't expect that to happen. Evans also stated that it would be an easy transition for the county and financially feasible to take over the city facilities and continue with 96 hour holding.

When Evans was questioned about building the jail next to the courthouse, he said "that could be a 5 hour discussion in itself", but generally there had been less public complaints if the jail was located next to the courthouse.

As for total cost of the facility, we won't know the cost for sure until bids are let. Prochaska & Associates schematic design construction estimate as of December 12, 2011 was $5,073,850. Because of the commissioner's decision not to take jail construction to a vote, they will be limited to a total construction cost of $5,075,000 not including the cost of the site.

The site cost is being funded by the county jail sinking fund which in the county budget of 2011-2012, proposed disbursements of approximately $490,000. As of March 12, 2012, after paying for the 520 Norris-Hepp property, the jail sinking fund balance reported by the commissioners was about $266,000. If you assume these funds will be spent on the jail and add them to the construction spending authority allowed by NE Statue 23-120 (no vote needed), you can expect we will have spent over $5,600,000 ($5,100,000 construction + $500,000 jail sinking fund for the site +contingencies) to get the jail open.

September 2011 What are the jail operating cost estimates?

McCook Gazette, 9/22/11.

{ {Option 1A is a 24-bed (expandable to 36) jail with room for sheriff's offices. It is not attached to the courthouse or the existing sheriff's office, and leaves room for parking on the far north end. Construction costs are estimated at $5,105,830; annual payments would be about $340,000 a year for 20 years.} }

McCook Gazette, 9/27/11

{ {The 20-year jail bond is estimated to cost $340,000 a year. At the county's current valuation, that boils down to an additional $46 a year in taxes for the owner of a $100,000 home, and an additional $460 a year for the owner of a $1 million farm or ranch.

While operating costs for a new jail are hard to pin down, commissioners and jail committee members are using budgets for similar-sized new jails in Cherry and Butler counties.

Downer said Sept. 21 that operating the city's holding cells with county staff and continuing to transport long-term prisoners will cost about $800,000 a year. The construction of a jail and its operations would cost about $983,000 a year over the same 20-year span. And the bond levy ends in 20 years.

"That's a pretty minimal difference when you come down to it," Downer said.} }

The 68 page Jail Feasibility Study (http://www.co.red-willow.ne.us/) by Prochaska & Associates dated September 8, 2011, reveals in Section 6.4 that the Allied Correctional Services study in 2005 estimated the operational cost of the jail at $441,144 per year. Prochaska & Associates then adjusted 2005 number for inflation (3.3% annually) to 2011 and calculated a 20 year average of $643,739. Based on inflationary increases since 2005, I have estimated $500,000 for the first year of the new jail expense, a 13.3% increase from 2005 to 2012 to get a starting expense value.

To this you must add a jail bond payment of $340,000 and the sheriff's office budget of $350,000. My estimate of the total county law enforcement cost now is $1,190,000 per year (Jail+Bond+Sheriff). This will inflate and increase until year 20 when the bond payment will be paid in full, and then it will be $340,000 less, reduced by the amount of the annual payment.

The audit of county law enforcement actual expense for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011 was $301,771 for jail services (all bed rent & transportation) + $334,516 for sheriff offices for a total of $636,287. There is no bond payment in 2011 as there is no new jail.

The 2012 budget is $312,800 for jail services and $357,760 for the sheriff's office, a total of $670, 560 for county law enforcement. There is no bond payment in 2012 either for the same reason as above.

Based on estimates from my information sources, the annual taxes to support Red Willow County jail services will increase about $520,000 per year (from 2012) when the new jail opens. This is the total of an $180,000 increase in general jail services expense plus the $340,000 bond payment. I have kept the sheriff's office cost the same at $350,000, but the reality is that it probably should have some proportional increase as there is a well established trend for higher salaries, health insurance, and other general expense.

Commissioner Downer may still think a $520,000 increase in annual county cost to operate a new jail could be considered "minimal", but I don't think that I would agree.

Calculated another way, as I noted in my first jail essay segment, the Red Willow County average daily cost of keeping a prisoner is going from $82 in 2011, to $230 in the first full year of operation of the new jail. In my opinion, this is outrageous and prohibitively expensive, and this alone should force the commissioners to look another direction with their proposal.

June 2011 Why don't we get to vote on the jail project?

The minutes of the June 29, 2011 jail study committee meeting indicates that Andy Snyder of Smith Hayes Financial Services was invited to share financing options for the jail.

He told the committee that one option was a traditional jail and bond approval election coinciding with a May or November regular election date or schedule a special election date.

He also told them of another option that could utilize the provisions of NE State Statute 23-120 which permits the county board to make an annual levy of up to 5.2 cents per $100 of the taxable value of property to construct, renovate, etc., a courthouse, jail, or other county building. This would allow the commissioners to obligate the county to a jail and bond without an approval vote of the registered county voters.

The minutes of the July 20, 2011 jail study committee meeting record that Commissioner McNutt informed the group that the bond limit under the authority of NE Statute 23-120 would be $5,075,000 to finance construction of the jail. The record of minutes also states that the jail committee group would like a construction option that does not exceed that amount.

The minutes of this meeting also reveal further discussion that the project budget is too costly at this point, and talk centered on ideas for reducing the size and content of the facility to reduce the cost below the $5,075,000 threshold of the "no vote needed" authority of NE Statute 23-120.

The group considered the Option 1A on Norris Avenue an ideal solution and it should be considered the law enforcement "Master Plan" for the future with deferred portions included or constructed as funding becomes available.

The minutes of the December 12, 2011 jail committee meeting state that Prochaska and Associates presented the schematic design phase of the project with a construction cost estimate of $5,073,850. That is $1,150 under the $5,075.000 limit of the authority of NE Statute 23-120.

The minutes of the December 19, 2011 regular county commissioner meeting records the unanimous approval by the commissioners of Prochaska & Associates schematic designs for the Law Enforcement Center with a construction cost estimate of $5,073,850.

And finally, on February 13, 3012, the minutes of the regular county commissioner meeting record the commissioner's unanimous approval to build the Law Enforcement Center on Norris Avenue, schedule an election in May 2012 to put the question of bond financing exceeding the state imposed 50 mill levy limit to a public vote, and retain D. A. Davidson as the bond underwriter.

April 2012 So what can we do to fix this?

Much of my frustration about the development of this jail project is about the expectations I have from government when it comes to managing the business of our community.

I have observed there are a couple ways to approach the management of a construction project for a public facility.

In one approach elected officials and community leaders work together to develop a right sized, well located, efficient proposal that brings the best economic value to the taxpayers considering the information available to base the decision. They then have the confidence to take the project to the public and sell the project through group meetings and personal persuasion, on the attributes and advantages of the project to earn voter approval. Perfect community harmony is never guaranteed under this approach, but it does offer an examination of the proposal in a public forum where many opportunities for questions are asked and answered. Whether the vote passes or fails, you have to conclude that the voters have weighed in, made a decision, and will live with it regardless whether hindsight proves it was right or wrong.

The other approach is where elected officials and community leaders would rather not be bothered by the opinions of others in the community as they know what is best for us. They will leverage what advantages available to them by law to move their agenda forward in an expedient manner, motivated by result rather than governmental processes. This approach runs the risk of creating deep personal divides in a community that have the potential to linger for years. This divisiveness can foster resentment and negative actions within the community that impede the progress that we need and could be proud of.

I have suggested to the commissioners many times over past year there are solutions that I think would garner more community support. I agree with them that a new facility is required but I have a different vision of where it should be and how it would function. My suggestions have largely been ignored as they obviously were only focused on their "vision" of what this facility should be.

I have offered the commissioners my vision of what our county jail might look like in the near future, and also well into the future. It would be on a "green site", in an area zoned for jails, with access to city utilities, expansion space, and near other correctional facilities in order to leverage partnerships for the delivery of correctional services, regardless of where the need might come from. The number of beds and prisoner population should be sized to maximize cost economies of scale with respect to inmate to jailer staff ratio efficiency benchmarks for the industry.

It is very important we protect the safety of the public, officers and prisoners, but not to the point of recklessly consuming all taxpayer financial resources available for this facility. This balancing of project priorities will truly give you the best value for correctional services and investment in law enforcement.

A successful proposal would utilize city, county, and state cooperation to operate efficiently, and it is absolutely way overdue that we as citizens should demand that. I am confident our community leaders are prepared to move forward on a new proposal if we can get the county commissioners to see their proposal has major financial and strategic problems, both short and long term, that can't be overcome.

This is a project that will affect McCook and Red Willow County for 50-100 years and it must be done in a way that brings diverse creative ideas and suggestions from the community into the fold. This has not happened as the commissioners planned their current proposal.

There is no question you could be a pessimist and conclude this won't happen. I prefer to be a bit optimistic and think we still have a chance, but it won't happen without convincing our county commissioners there is a better way. I have been working at this for a quite a while now and I could use a little help. If you don't think it is worth the effort, I still feel a little better as I hope you are now better informed about what you can expect from the commissioners jail proposal. I am not giving up; I believe there is way too much at stake to do that.