BC 2005 12 19 REGULAR - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

December 19, 2005 - Regular Meeting Page 433 Districtsi certificates of Participationi Design-Buildi Electronic Road pricingi Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle Bondsi Partnership Schoolsi State Infrastructure Banksi Small Scale Water and Wastewater Systems; Special Districts; State Revolving Loan Fundsi Tax Exempt Municipal Lease Financingi and Tax Increment Financing. He challenged the Board to talk with State legislators about bringing some of these tools to Cabarrus County. Donna Ludwig, resident of 212 North Union Street, stated she and her husband have lived in Concord for 20 years and her main opposition to locating the jail complex in downtown Concord was the children. She said two elementary schools with over 700 children were within walking distance of the proposed jail and preschool centers were located just blocks from the downtown area. Ms. Ludwig cited safety concerns for the children as well as the women who volunteer daily at the schools. She also commented on safety issues associated with children waiting for school buses, walking to and from after school programs, playgrounds, the Boys and Girls Club, the library, etc. Robert Fulgham, resident of 391 North Union Street, expressed concern about the size of the proposed Jail project and objected to its location in downtown Concord. He asked the Board to consider scaling down the proposed facility and to look at the alternate proposals. Betsy Ross Bare, resident of 144 Hillcrest Street in Concord, commented on how the Board functions, its 3-2 votes on a number of prior decisions and past efforts to re-open discussions regarding the Jail project. She questioned how the County had gotten to the current overcrowding and asked why the County was not looking at the cause of the overcrowding and at ways to provide different kinds of services for the inmates. Heath Ritchie, resident of 391 Union Street South, stated he had been the President of the Residents of Historic Concord (RHC) for the past three years. He commented on the process of talking about the new jail facility and stated RHC's original resolution of support was for a far different project than the one now being planned. Mr. Ritchie stated the residents support the effort for a new j ail and sheriff's office but have the following concerns about the project: (1) Site has become much larger than initially planned without public input; (2) Residents were allowed to choose little more than variations of the fa9ade designs at the public work sessions; and (3) Decision to add the j ail annex was made with no public input. Mr. Ritchie urged the Board to listen to local citizens as ideas are formulated and presented that can allow the jail facility to become an integral part of downtown Concord and ensure the well-being of the downtown and historic neighborhoods for the next 50 years. Erik Olson, resident of 70 Washington Lane SE in Concord, stated Citizens for a Better Concord (CBC) was an advocacy group comprised of local residents and business owners who were committed to finding a workable solution of the jail overcrowding issues facing Cabarrus County. He said CBC opposed the location of the proposed 72-foot high inmate housing complex within any residential area of Cabarrus County. Mr. Olson stated the proposed project did not conform to the City of Concord Downtown Master plan or Land Use Plan. He said the CBC had provided an alternate plan that utilizes the same site and had endorsed the construction of a smaller Sheriff's Office, public safety center and inmate housing facility along the existing commercial corridor of Corban Avenue. Dr. Martha Sommer of 195 N. Union Street in Concord presented a project timeline provided by the County. She reviewed events on the time line and stated in her opinion the public was not fully informed of the proposed jail project. Further, she said the public had been misled regarding the size, design and location of the project. Dr. Sommer asked the Board to go back to the drawing board and to present all the facts to the citizens. John Turner, resident of 479 Union Street South, stated he was for the new jail but not as it was currently proposed. He said there were several problems with the process and methods the County used to communicate its jail plan to the residents. First, Mr. Turner stated the four original letters of endorsement were for a 250-bed facility and the County failed to contact the authors of those letters when the number of beds increased. Also, he said only 40 persons attended the open house at which the current site was selected and those residents did not have the necessary information to make an informed decision. Finally, he questioned the information provided by the County, its request for public input and how the jail project had been promoted.