Sunday, April 24, 2011

The Jail Lockup

The April 18th City Council debate on the future of the City's jail is a prime example of what ails our town. In the past, I have supported a renovated/new jail facility as a cost saving measure. The item before Council was to retain RCU Architects to develop plans and cost estimates for a new/renovated jail.

Designed, built and opened between 1986-89 the jail was already obsolete from its first design; its straight line design requires lots of staff to operate. The result is annual and chronic losses of about a million dollars per year. While crime should not pay for Euclid, other communities have facilities that are far cheaper to operate.

Euclid tax payers spent millions on the current jail, which is falling apart, but, now are being asked to invest 3.2 million more (estimated) for a renovated/new facility. This will allow the jail to operate with less personnel, reducing our annual operating cost, thus saving money.

This very solution has stared Euclid in the face since the early 1990's. The question is, if the current facility is such a dog, why is the City government only doing something about it now, 22 years after it had opened?

This past City Council meeting sheds much light on that. Unfortunately, because of the Passover holiday, I was not present. But after reviewing the meeting, here are some observations on the matter:

Incomplete Information: Police Chief Repicky states he has been working on "his" plan for 2 plus years. The complete story is that this Administration has been floating some sort of jail plan since 2006. Here is a rough time line:

*On May 22 & June 5, 2006 this Administration proposed hiring DLZ inc to develop
jail renovation plans. They were not retained.

*2007, RCU Architects hired to develop renovation plans. Plans received by Council
February 13, 2008. Study set aside,

*March 4, 2009: Horne Architects presents another plan for jail and POLICE
STATION construction. The site would be north of the current jail, in Memorial
Park. This plan required a bond issue vote of the people in November, 2009. Plans
scrapped

*Fall, 2009: RCU brought back on board: Different set of plans developed for jail;
finished December, 2009, first presented to Council April, 2010.

*January 19, 2011: Another committee meeting, a meeting that almost literally
repeated the April, 2010 meeting.

Missing Data: All the way back to 2006, some members of Council asked for information such as:
* Comparing estimated financial data with other jail facilities (such as Bedford Hts.)
* The cost per day of housing prisoners in our current jail
* Can a new facility be regionalised, shared among other communities and Cuyahoga County?
* Will the Cuyahoga County Sheriff guarantee the number of County prisoners held at our jail?

After 5 years, Council still has no answers, little real data, no actual agreements. I heard only promises of what would happen. No project should be done this way.

Euclid is Reactive: The Council President made the point that the jail only came up because recent City budget issues. She is correct: Euclid takes action only when the crisis is at our front door. Before that, and, what should have you all angry, the City made no moves that I am aware of to save your money operating the jail.

So, to summarize, our current jail was obsolete from the day it opened, losing the tax payers about 1 million dollars per year. Since 2006, the current Administration has consulted/retained three different firms, and, has come up with three different plans. In that 5 year time, many questions have not been answered.

And, perhaps worst of all, while the Administration has drifted, we continue to lose money at the jail. Why is that important? With a much earlier "fix" for the jail; by saving money on its operation, we may not have needed the trash and/or lighting fees.


Jail renovations to save tax payer money is still a great idea. But, the discussion I saw answered few of the questions that have existed since 2006! One of the rolls of any Administration is to answer Council's questions. That did not happen on Monday night. However, I still would have held my nose and voted for this. Its the only way to gather any semblance of impartial information on this project before giving final OK for construction.


***************


Please See the City Web Site concerning important information on the Natural Gas Aggregation Program: City Announces $5.28/MCF Rate for Natural Gas ~ effective May thru October