BC 2006 02 20 REGULAR - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

February 20, 2006 - Regular Meeting Page 503 Chairman Carruth opened the meeting for comments from the committee members. Sheriff Brad Riley stated he supported Option 1 due to the time issue and the need to move forward with some type of temporary relief for the safety of the inmates and the officers. He stated Electronic House Arrest (ERA) had been discussed with the judges and the others in the judicial process and they felt the program would not fix the overcrowding issue. He said those persons who fit the criteria for ERA were not in the County's facility at this time. Further, he stated his department would begin the program if approved by the Board and implemented by the judges. Sheriff Riley reviewed ERA programs in other counties and compared the size of jails along with the construction of new jails in counties where house arrest was being utilized. Alex Porter, resident of 193 South Union Street, stated he and Deborah Arbes alternated participation on the Review Committee as representatives of the Citizens for a Better Concord (CBC). He said it was frustrating that the committee members could not talk about a satellite or temporary jail to be constructed at a different site. Mr. Porter stated Option 3, which moves the housing closer to the courthouse, would reduce the distance and time spent in taking the prisoners to the courthouse. Also, it would move the buildings farther from the residential areas and have less impact on the future tax values. He stated the common sense approach would be to build a temporary jail and enable the Sheriff to stop transporting prisoners to Alamance County. Mr. Porter supported a smaller jail downtown to serve the courts and a larger facility at a location that would allow unlimited expansion possibilities in the future. Deborah Arbes, resident of 348 Union Street South, stated the parameters for the Jail Review Committee were too restrictive and the participants had no input into the ground rules. She said the CBC had entered the process because they felt discussion was the key to resolution. Ms. Arbes reviewed the following points on CBC's first petition: Build the public safety building as designed; Build the jail annex as soon as possible (96 beds); Do not build the six-story housing unit or the future housing unit; and Build housing units on a remote site away from residential areas. She outlined the following four-point CBC plan that she stated they had been unable to present at the committee meeting: (1) All new construction to be confined to the originally approved site; (2) Height not to exceed that of existing Courthouse; (3) Simultaneously construct a satellite housing unit on a remote site and have sufficient property to support long term growth; and (4) Place uThe Gulley" property in a perpetual conservation trust. MS. Arbes stated that CBC and RHC support Option 3 because of the increased efficiency associated with the housing unit being closer to the courthouse. She said Option 3 was a compromise on their past positions and questioned the lack of compromise by the County. Ms. Arbes said the major problem with Option 3 was the need for bed space and construction of a previously planned temporary jail would have prevented the crisis situation at this time. She asked that the County build a temporary jail off the primary site and allow the process that had been started to continue. Chief District Court Judge william G. Hamby, Jr., stated he wished to correct the impression that persons were not being charged with crimes because of jail overcrowding problem. He said persons were not being arrested and bond set for their appearance in court but many were getting paper citations directing them to come to court rather than requiring them to post a bond out of a jail that is overcrowded. Judge Hamby stated policies have been implemented over the past seven years to alleviate overcrowding as much as possible and ERA would not reduce the number of people in jail by a significant number. In regards to Options 1 and 3, Judge Hamby stated there were some additional costs in Option 3 as well as some advantages in operation. However, he stated Option 3 would create a delay of two years for the first available bed space as well as reduce in the number of beds by 96, which he estimated at 7 to 10 years of useful life of the building. Allan Bartnick, resident of 113 Union Street and representative of Residents of Historic Concord (RHC), commented on the following key issues for the other Committee members: Sheriff Riley - time: Judge Hamby - capacity and useful life of the facility; Concord Downtown Development Corporation - courthouse and jail to remain in downtown Concord. He stated the primary concern of RHC was the historic district and CBC's concern was building mass in proximity to residential units. Mr. Bartnik expressed concern about the guidelines and constraints placed on the committee but stated they were still able to come up with two viable options. He stated the residents want a downtown jail but do not want the massive structure in the gully as shown in