Travis County Commissioners Court
October 19, 2004
Item A2
A-2 is discuss various options for new jail construction at del valle correctional
complex. We sort of rushed through this item. During the -- during the latter
part of the work session on -- on Thursday and we -- we put this back on just
in case there was some follow-up issues that we need to discuss further.
>> good afternoon, mike trimble, criminal justice coordinator
here on behalf of the jail study physical plant. Del valle site. I just wanted
out to you information from last Thursday, which had to do if we had the construction
today current dallas, what were some of the savings that would be anticipated,
a workup on that. If you have any question abouts that, bill campbell is here
to answer any of those questions. Different items that you had to review from
last week, I guess at this point whatever questions you all have about that.
>> I know the goal was to get something, in terms of some
kind of a motion out of the court, when you go over to see the jail standards
folks, it's not simply a we've been talking about it, doing all of this stuff,
something that we will call it an end result of some sort, even if it's one
that pushes us in a certain direction, certain what's the next step.
>> yes, we have to get our back up into the jail commission.
Probably the latest tomorrow, Thursday. But of course if you all wait until
next Tuesday to actually, you know, take the vote, we will be able to of course
get testimony as to that action. But if we -- if we did get some kind of indication
of -- of where we thought we were headed, then of course I could give that
in the backup this week to jail standards.
>> [indiscernible] draft letter or a draft document that
we could sign-off on. There -- there are several steps I think that we ought
to outline in the letter.
>> to jail standards?
>> right.
>> I have drafted a -- a letter, judge. For the sheriff's
signature, I would be happy to modify it for the court's signature, also.
It does -- it does kind of outline, you know, give history, a background of
where we have been with -- with our variance beds and the different things
that we have done to try to get our population down and -- where we think
we're headed. I will be happy to e-mail that to you and to the rest of the
-- to the rest of the court to review.
>> so in your letter, when do you say the new beds will be
available for occupancy?
>> I don't talk about that.
>> oh, --
>> judge, because -- I would -- I just make a vague reference
that we are hopeful that we will have beds in the future to replace the variance
beds. That's all of our goals, that where we're reading, but no -- where we're
heading, but no time specific dates in there on that. I really think on the
fourth what the jail commission is looking for is the -- exactly what Commissioner
Sonleitner is saying is that there is -- there is some -- some further action
and what we are proposing in the -- in the predesign phases is exactly what
they are looking for, it shows that we have committed to look at and not necessarily
tell them exactly what that number is going to be, but that we are looking
at jail expansion because we understand that we have a population growth in
that -- we do have buildings that have gone beyond their useful life and need
to be replaced. And that -- that, you know, one of the main goals is to replace
those variance beds. The study is a very positive step in getting us going
in that direction, you all are supportive of that, of course that's what we
believe we need. But I need to get the backup in. Probably at latest Thursday.
To the jail commission, late -- late this Thursday, they promised they would
get in the jail Commissionerer's back up to review before we go over there
on the fourth. I would be happy to share that with you, if you all can sends
me your comments really quick. Of course I知 sure judge you could sign for
the court.
>> I知 looking for a whole lot more than that. The figure
that we were looking at was roughly $100 million.
>> correct.
>> and immediate expenditure of 500 to 700, just for the
planning and preengineering. The other thing is whether we seek voter approval,
if so, when. You see what I知 saying? If we do that, there's a public education
effort that's necessary. If the purpose of the preengineering is to land on
a fairly accurate figure, the question is when do we select the expert to
help with that, you see what I知 saying? When do we think that figure is available?
Part of the public education plan seems to -- to me almost has to say the
state has asked for these bids, the -- the state asked for these beds, the
variance beds to be given back. The state has not given us any indication
that they plan to back off this request. In fact this request is fairly rigid
and applies state-wide, right? Because the last time that I was there, they
were talking about variance beds, they were going county to county. It wasn't
like they were sitting in Travis County. It was like everybody they were calling
up variance beds, they were asking basically when do you plan to give those
beds back to us, when will you billed to make these beds unnecessary. So I
think voters understand that, that's a significant percentage of the total
number of beds we are asking for. But I think my guess is the average voter
may well not be aware of exactly what variance beds are and whether the --
whether the state commission on jail standards has the authority to insist
on getting them back, which I understand legally it has the absolute authority.
And really can pretty much set the time. They can say in 60 days we want them
back, they are too reasonable to do that. I知 thinking that they have been
more than --
>> well --
>> they have been more than patient with us. So -- so I mean
that part of it I think kind of boxes us in. But there are other steps that
we ought to take because that makes so much sense. If you are building this
number of beds, you really ought to go ahead and billed to meet our immediate
needs, that gets -- it's a big number I guess is what I知 saying.
>> yes, sir. I -- my perception is that -- is that as long
as i've been going to the meetings at jail standards, as long as you are showing
progress, moving forward, they will continue to be reasonable with you. But
as Commissioner Daugherty and Commissioner Gomez probably remember, when we
went to the jail commission meeting in harris county, in bexar county, could
not prove that they had been making any reasonable type of -- type of progress,
they took their variance beds. It was a big number. They told them today,
today you don't have any more variance beds. So good luck. That severely,
they can't tell them what to do with their inmates, but they request absolutely
as you said, they have the authority to take those beds away. They did. Now
I -- I don't believe that that's where we are going. You are right. They have
been very reasonable with us. And we have made a lot of progress, the jotf
did a great job in 2003 to get our population down, to them that's great progress.
So this is just another sign that we are continuing to progress towards giving
back those variance beds and doing what we need to do for our population.
>> well, am I the only one who thought that we were supposed
to go back over in December and not -- not November?
>> they -- what they did was they went from having a meeting
every two months back to their quarterly calendar, so that changed their dates.
>> okay.
>> so they didn't -- the commission didn't feel the need
to meet every two months because a lot of the counties were doing a lot better
in their -- in their inspections and with their issues, so we went back to
a quarterly calendar. It changed the data. It originally was December, it
went back to November. So --
>> seems like this kind of a letter can easily be written,
although it is not written as we speak, but talks about, I mean, exactly what
the major is talking about. What have we done in the last year since we last
went to see the jail standards, the proverbial we because I wasn't there.
We had the jail overcrowding task force continuing to meet, efforts related
to the control of the population, everybody involved, hiring and the consultants
report which generated three different options related to a concept for what
to do about del valle, the court focusing its attention and time and energies
and costing out on c 2, which is made up of replacement of the full amount
of variance beds, replacement beds because of parts of the campus that would
be destroyed, to make room for all of this stuff. And for a certain number
of expansion beds and how we arrived at that particular number. We are costing
everything out, including avoided costs if these things were here and available
today. We certainly committed in our budget related to doing the preliminary
engineering, the question was whether we could sweep it out of some kind of
existing bond funds, left over cjc moneys, but to make that's a technical
issue in terms of the commitment to get that because we want to land on what
will it take to accomplish c 2 if that's the way we are going. To again say
we appreciate whatever time we have been given because this is not something
that you can -- that you can wave a magic wand and make it happen. We are
trying to land on a timing related to if we do indeed go to the voters, what
is the timing of such an election. Or not, given that it seems like there
are few choices here related to the giving back of the variance beds and when
you have an election, you are usually creating the impression with folks that
there's a choice, I would certainly like to get back to a discussion at that
at some point about whether this is something that we do as cos, because I
think that how many if not of the other large urban counties are doing it
because there isn't a choice on some of this stuff. If you don't have your
ballot issue passed, as in Williamson county, you then create a whole new
set of problems because you complaint then do a co issuance because the voters
said no. It's a good discussion to have. I think there is a letter that can
be written --
>> exactly why we ought to vote now. That's exactly why we
should vote in [indiscernible] what's to keep you from sending a letter and
us having this on the court's agenda next week formally acting on it. If we
can't act, they have your letter. If we can, we send ours over as a supplement
to your letter. In my view this is a big enough deal for us to vote one way
or the other. Ones we make reputations to the state jail commission, safety
commission on jail standards, seems to me it really ought to represent the
Commissioners court position as to the money. As to how we plan to go about
getting this done. My guess is the commission will want to know same as we,
when we go out to voters, I really think we ought to on an amount that big
and the voters turn you down, then tough live with that. At the same time
then you have to live with that. At the same time that's not the same as the
state living with us keeping those vearn beds. There are -- variance beds.
There are different parts of this deal which I have come to fully appreciate.
If three members of the court want to go out for the cos for $100 million,
doesn't bother me at all once I have my chance to cast a vote against it.
But in fairness we have a responsibility if it makes sense to us, it does
to me. I assume we can persuade the average Travis County taxpayers here is
what we need to do, who are the consequences if we don't. That aside, though,
I guess that I would feel better doing that up front and making representations
in writing from the court at the meeting in November even if it gets there
the day before, see what I知 saying, than if you go out on a limb and have
us vote in a manner contrary to what you represent. I haven't seen the letter,
it may be the same letter that I would write if I was in your position. But
I don't want this Commissioners court voting after I sent my letter over.
>> okay, judge.
>> what I知 suggesting to the court is if you have your letter
and the sheriff agrees with it, it can be a letter from the sheriff's office.
But at some point if they want to know where does the Commissioners court
stand by law, we are supposed to agendize this and act on it, which is next
Tuesday. [indiscernible], there are six or seven issue that's I think the
court needs to discuss, vote on in open session and I would put together the
same document that if somebody asked me why should I support this deal, hold
on a minute, let me share this document with you, hand it to them, three or
four pages. It ought to indicate the reasons why we think it makes sense.
>> that's what happened up in Williamson county. And their
election lost and they were forced to hire out beds in a private jail, which
created all sorts of other issues, because the voters said no.
>> maybe someone on this court wants to issue cos. I would
want a reason why we should not vote these down. Somebody may say well if
you owe the state about 600 beds, why not build 600? That was close to my
position a few weeks ago. There are reasons why we ought to build a thousand
more. That makes sense to me. And I知 thinking it makes sense to the average
voter. Now, our president and the presidential contender now will say this
is the public's money. So they ought to have the right to make a call on it.
I think. But at the same time I知 just one of five votes. But for my vote,
for $100 million, you know, I think we give voters an opportunity to respond.
And informed of the consequences of a rejection.
>> yes, sir.
>> well, there are other things to talk about. If we are
going to be having a bond election, which I知 fine with, if everybody wants
to go with a bond election great, but there are a whole lot of other things
to talk about for a bond election f. That's the case we need to get a citizens
bond committee up and running quickly because we would be on cycle for November
of '05 if we stay on our four year cycle. If we are committed to doing that,
there are issues beyond what's going on with the jail related to transportation
and mobility, essential parks and open -- certainly parks and open space,
goodness knows what's going to be out there. That's left over from '01. We
are lment done with our -- we are almost done with our '01 projects, they
are out the door and we are doing what we said we would be doing.
>> get a committee in place then.
>> I agree.
>> when I went to a meeting 18 months ago, we talked about
what is now history. Talked about putting in place various initiatives that
we thought would enable us to better manage the jail population, they were.
So I don't know that the commission is going to hear a whole lot more about
those. We gave them 150 back, but we said we promise to give you these others.
This was a year and a half or two years ago.
>> December of '02 and to answer the letter question, we
will send our letter. But I think it would be very helpful if a member or
members of the court was at the -- the November 4th meeting and had, you know,
your letter as an add reason dumb, which -- addendum will the court will absolutely
accept --
>> if we act on it, we can post it.
>> I will be out of the country, oh, darn.
>> [laughter]
>> well, yeah.
>> the meeting is here in Austin.
>> that makes it convenient.
>> what's the exact date?
>> the 4th and the meeting starts at 9 can. I have not seen
-- at 9:00. I have not seen the agenda, I don't know where we are on the agenda.
>> that --
>> Thursday.
>> it's a Thursday. Always Thursday.
>> I think we owe is to ourselves, Travis County residents
and the commission for the court to take action.
>> I agree.
>> I think that if we set out the truth, based on my reading
of the court here, we want to do the right thing. My guess is that is what
they want to hear. But they also want to know when. And so the document that
I have in mind, won't give exact dates but will give some indication. Some
of these big things are controlled by forces beyond us. Either we comply with
them or we are into the next cycle which means you add several months on to
it. I am thinking about a definitive document, but also thinking about what
I would use as a number education piece.
>> sure.
>> well, I think they need to be continuing to see forward
process. I think we do have forward progress to be shown because to do a jail
project you can't do it in six months. Just to do this preliminary engineering
work is going to go about a year to 18 month process if it's typical compared
to all of the other things that we have to do preliminary engineering on.
>> here's my biggest concern. Having gone to that one two
years ago, I didn't know enough to even be in the room. I had been in office
for about 44 hours. [laughter] I fear that, you know, that you tell these
people your intentions, and you have some pretty long memories with regards
to what you are actually going to try to do. For us to write a letter and
to indicate to them that we are willing to spend six to $800,000 on -- because
that's really, you know, what this may be, I mean, what roger told us last
week. They pretty much expect you to go that way, I would think. Maybe I will
think something differently after the 4th. I do intend to go, I知 willing
to speak. As a matter of fact I want to ask a few questions just to let them
educate me with regards to -- to -- so how is it that you really just tell
people, you figure out a way to pay for it, because that's what we are going
to do. If I start doing some real quick math about -- about $40 a day a person
out of county, you know, I知 talking about being able to take care of 100
people, for a year's time for a million and a half dollars, which may give
me enough time to really get comfortable with $100 million. Now, just as the
precinct 3 Commissioner, I will tell you that you are going to have to doctor
something up in this community to sell this community, I think, on spending
$100 million to build new incarceration facilities. Now, that's not saying
you can't do it. I think that you could sell this community on toll roads
if you take enough time to do it. I mean and really present the picture about
you don't have any choice. Now, you know, obviously we have choices but then
you have smart people start asking ya pretty smart questions. Those are what
are your alternatives and your alternatives are, I mean, hey is limestone
county willing to sell their jail? I mean to heck with paying them $40 a day.
I don't know, those are questions that may sound strange but there is a line
of questions that I would like to have answered and I just can't believe if
we go and present a picture that we realize that we have got to do something,
what we did with our jail overcrowding task force, certainly helped us for
a while. But you know what? We are seeing the numbers blip back up there.
There are a number of reasons y'all that that happens. You know, we've had
an economy that's gone sideways, we've had all of these -- it would only stand
to reason that there are some explanations as to why some of those numbers
have gotten to where they have gotten, especially given that the state continues
to pull things away from us funding-wise, so I think we have got a credible
story to say we realize that we got to do something, but I知 really reticent
about writing a letter that basically tells them that we are going to appropriate
$800,000 to start moving that direction because I really do think that we
could spend a lot of money, because I think $800,000 is a lot of money, only
to find out that you know what, the voters won't approve that. I think that
voters will get bothered if they turndown a bond and then you turn around
and do cos.
>> you can't. Susan won't let it go through.
>> so you really have to --
>> you have to do cos on the variance beds.
>> I don't know that the state cares what the planning and
engineering costs. I wouldn't put in the letter what it would cost. I would
make sure in the letter that we have the money, if we hold out that we are
trying to do certain work. There's no way to get to the next step without
planning and preengineering.
>> right.
>> for them they want to see us do that, because that will
take some time. I think they need to be under the impression that we are not
sitting here twiddling our thumbs if they see a six, seven, eight month gap
there. There's working done to either issue cos or voter authorization. The
other thing about voter authorization is I知 assuming that taxpayers are as
realistic as I am. It is not a good situation with the variance bed and the
need for other beds. And I think that if -- if they are informed, they will
do the right thing saying that we do [indiscernible] here. But I also know
that there are certain steps that you have got to make sure that voters are
educated to make informed decisions. If they turn them down, though, I知 under
the impression that the state legally has the authority to say okay your voters
turned it down, we want our variance beds starting at midnight. Midnight when?
Tonight. [laughter] then -- five or 600 of them at $40 a day in other counties,
transportation there. I mean you are looking at a whole lot of money basically.
I知 -- this is kind of the hand we were dealt and have to play with now. But
the other thick is to me that's -- the other thing more the reason why it
has to be brought back here and we vote on it. Whatever the majority votes
to do is what the state jail commission has to be told. If they have the authority
to say we don't like that decision, and it matters, then we may have to look
at it again. When it comes to the variance beds, whether or not there's a
designed capacity out there, my guess is they have a whole lot more authority
than we do because they are the state agency authorized to regulate the area
and their jurisdiction is kind of limited. When they have jurisdiction over
it, it's pretty much absolute, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> the legislature has kind of done that. I was kind of amazed
myself several years back to realize how much authority they really have.
The courts routinely sanction, hold up their decisions because they are the
state regulatory agency.
>> they are at pointed by --
>> the governor.
>> the governor appoints every one of them?
>> yes.
>> again, I would have to defer to somebody who has a lot
more history with it. But I just can't imagine you being put in such a punitive
position where literally, you are going to beat us up, take our vearndz beds.
>> talk to san antonio, it happened in bexar county.
>> I was sitting there. I watched it. What it sounded to
me like is that san antonio basically hadn't made any movement at all towards
rectifying their problem. I don't think -- we are not sitting here, we can
show tapes and we can show all the work that we have done in terms of recognizing
that there is something that we do need to do and that we are going to move
towards that. But I don't know that -- maybe the answer, judge, is the fact
that you don't have to say we are going to spend this amount of dollars. That's
the kind of thing that bothers me because I think people hold you to your
numbers.
>> it would be lovely if the state legislature decided to
take all of the blue warrant off our hands and stuck them into state jail
facilities. There are ways, we ought to push for the state to be part of this
solution. But they are not showing any inclination to take things on. They
seem to be finding more ways to dump things off. And I think the information
that we got in the work session last week about them taking the administrative
licensing hearings and trying to toss them back into county courts at law
around the state of Texas, is not only frightening, but beyond disrespectful
they are looking at cutting their costs and they don't care if we have to
raise property taxes as long as they can stay pure with we didn't raise taxes.
Once again they are asking the counties to be the adults in this relationship.
>> I think we have enough positive things to say for ourselves
in a letter and --
>> we do.
>> and still leave the impression that we are taking this
seriously and that we have done things that we can put in the letter. I don't
mind anybody holding my feet to the fire on what -- the positive steps that
we have taken.
>> I don't either.
>> and then I think we need to move to that citizens committee.
So they can look at it, I think they will be fair.
>> other things that we need to do, this is not the only
thing.
>> what if we don't mention the variance beds.
>> I think they will remember it [laughter]
>> they came out to facility a month ago, we walked around
to every single building and counted every single bunk together. The four
of us. Three inspectors and myself. All day long, counted beds, it was a lot
of fun.
>> they weren't wearing rose colored glasses, binders.
>> judge, I think they are going to bring it up [laughter]
>> the other thing from a -- this is a democratic government
perspective, the five of us need to decide ourselves what it is that we are
willing to do. We need to put that on the agenda, bring it in, vote on it.
After that, it ain't set in stone, but the decision has been made, we move
on. Dr. All of these other things that can happen to Austin us to reconsider.
I was thinking if I were part of the state jail commission and two years ago
reminded Travis County you've had these variance beds 10 years, then if I
didn't see a plan with all of them handed back, I would certainly see another
150 or 200. If voters turned it down, we can say voters turned it down, we
can give you 200 back right now, putting in place another strategy. Are we
using all of the variance beds or just some of them?
>> every one.
>> using them all currently.
>> there's no way to get around for the replacing them really.
If they take them back, we need other beds or we have to contract out for
the same number. So --
>> right now the way the population is, we have actually
seen a little decrease, this will almost sound silly, but right now I could
give up 24. I could give up the 24 that's in building 4, which is a minimum
security building. Could I do that, that's about it.
>> do you think that would make them happy?
>> well, you know, it's a step in the right direction.
>> I wouldn't take away the flexibility. [multiple voices]
>> right now we are using those beds as overflow from the
downtown facility on our minimum security inmates. I could do it, but those
24 beds then I open a building that I知 not -- that isn't open right now.
I staff it with overtime. Instead of leaving the beds where they are. And
using the current staffing. So it has an impact if I give them up. You know,
but I could give them up, but I would rather not because it's going to cost
me too much in overtime. It doesn't make sense right now to give them up.
I do encourage y'all to have this on the agenda Tuesday and to take a vote.
One way or the other. I agree with you.
>> do we want to take a stab at writing our own letter? Maybe
we can all try writing a version of the letter and see if people can find
a complain fort level.
>> I can e-mail y'all mine, see what I have written.
>> I think there are five or six major issue that's we need
to address as a court that relate to beds, whether we advise the state jail
commission about it or not. See what I知 saying? On one hand there is reporting
to them on the other hand, though, there is what do we do in this community
about the jail beds we need? So you know the need to report back to the state
jail commission simply makes us add more urgently I think on some issues that
relate to jail beds but not necessarily what they want to hear about. But
it doesn't mean we ought not to address them.
>> you send that letter to us, I think each of us ought to
try to figure out, maybe send to the county attorney working on this, list
of issue that's we think we need to decide on ourselves. For instance if the
committee says no we don't think that you all want to build a contract, at
least we would have an ability to compare what the costs would be, you know,
one way or the other.
>> absolutely.
>> and see --
>> maybe those are pros and cons that the committee feeds
to see. This is sort of against the back drop of the state running short of
beds and I saw in a recent -- I get newsletter for everybody, criminal justice
newsletter where the state is looking around for counties with excess beds
to contract out for state inmates.
>> right.
>> well, other nice change that's happened since the last
time we had this on our ballot in '97 is that there's now been a change in
the law represented to i'll call it design build for lack of a better expression.
Where you can better corral your costs into something looking for a turnkey.
High that number is the number is the number, represented to what it will
cost to build some of these things. Before we didn't that that kind of flexibility
related to how some of these things are now being packaged via a new -- be
ate new courthouse -- be it a new courthouse or jails, this whole design build
thing gives us more options as opposed to fewer options. So back on the agenda
next week.
>> yes, sir.
>> send us your letter.
>> yes, I will do it as soon as I get back to the office.
>> judge, we may need to change the wording on this agenda
item. I知 not seeing and take appropriate action.
>> on Thursday we will post it for further discussion. Okay.
Thank you very much.
>> thank you.
>> next week. Anybody else on this item? A 2?
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 3:31 PM