Amidst ongoing pressure from the state to address inmate
overcrowding at Loudon County Justice Center, county
officials and law enforcement took another stab at a
financially palatable option for either renovating the
current facility or constructing a freestanding jail and
courtroom.
On a request from the Loudon County Corrections Partnership Committee, which narrowed construction plans to two proposals last month, officials with Loudon County Sheriff’s Office and the Ninth Judicial District Attorney General’s office gave a presentation Monday during a Loudon County Commission workshop.
Law enforcement officials said transportation of
inmates, security, a disproportionate inmate-to-jailer
ratio and proper categorization were some of the
problems facing the county.
LCSO Lt. Jake Keener said that as of early this month,
the jail had 175 inmates, including 125 males and 50
females. Keener and Assistant Chief Deputy Jimmy Davis
showed commission photos of inmates sleeping on floors
and crowded into common areas inside the current
facility.
Davis said one of his main concerns was officer safety,
noting that typically, three deputies are on patrol at
the jail and another operates the control room.
“Those three deputies can be outnumbered by just the
individuals you see in this photograph,” Davis said.
“Now add 30 more males to that. They pop the door, those
people decide they want to take over the jail they can,
which means all 170 inmates can be out, and then I’ve
got four officers that are victims themselves, so my
problem is the safety and security of my officers and
the facility, and then you’ve got the community after
that.
“This is one of the key problems of some of the design
issues in our current facility that obviously need to be
addressed, and overcrowding just compounds that danger,”
he added.
In addition to the two main plans, LCSO and the district
attorney also presented a third option for about $16.5
million that included a cheaper courtroom scheme.
Johnson said the $31 million plan, which would provide
for the county’s jail and courtroom needs for decades,
would be a good fit for Centre 75 and help in
jump-starting the business park.
“This is the high dollar amount that everybody’s scared
of,” Russell said. “It’s the elephant in the room, but I
want you all to just look at it and consider it.”
Commissioner Van Shaver said he wanted the jail
committee to come back with a single preferred option.
“I would love for the committee to vote on one plan and
say, ‘Here is what the committee recommends that the
county commission do’,” Shaver said. “I mean that was
the whole purpose of the committee. You brought us back
a whole plethora of things — Centre 75 — the whole nine
yards. That committee I would have thought was charged —
bring back your proposal.”
Commissioner Bill Satterfield, who sits on the jail
panel along with Commissioners Leo Bradshaw and Henry
Cullen, said members of the Corrections Partnership
Committee asked members of the county board how much
they were willing to spend on a new jail and did not get
any answers.
“That not being done, then we proceeded and looked at
everything,” Satterfield said. “We’ve gone forward.
We’ve come backward, and it’s really hard once you sit
in one these things (meetings), it’s really hard to
separate the jail and the courts. I mean they kind of go
hand in hand. When you do one, you look back and you’ve
got to do the other.”
The jail panel decided on two options and agreed to put
them before commission for consideration, he said.
“If you had charged this committee to come back with a
recommendation not to exceed (a certain dollar amount),
then tonight you would have a recommendation,”
Satterfield said.
Shaver said costs associated with a project like the
jail has the propensity to balloon beyond what
commission is willing to pay.
“Right now, the closest thing you’ve got to the rest of
the jail is right here,” he said about the cheapest
option. “And it’s just easy to throw another $5 million
on it, throw another $5 million — just put $31 million
in it, and that’s not even close to what the cost $31
million is going to be. That’s just that building
sitting (with) there no furniture, fixtures (or) site
prep or anything.
“You all have spent since we got elected looking at this
stuff, and now you’ve essentially brought it back to us,
(and said) ‘Here’s all the possibilities,” he added.
“Pick one. Pick one as the committee and send it to us,
and we’ll either up it or down it.”
Satterfield said he thought members of commission were
“afraid” of throwing their support behind any specific
plan because of the potential for negative blowback from
the public related to raising property taxes.
“I don’t call that ‘afraid’,” Commissioner Earlena
Maples said. “I call that ‘cautious with taxpayer
money.’ I don’t go out and blow my money personally, and
I don’t intend to blow the taxpayers’ money. I’ve never
done it. I don’t intend to do it, and I think we ought
to treat the taxpayers’ money just like we would our
own. Would you go out and do this with your own money?”
Johnson said jail committee members had an “impossible
task” if commission is not willing to spend anything on
building a jail.
“I think if you want us to make a recommendation on how
to address the jail problem, which is going to require
building a new jail, you can’t do that for zero
dollars,” Russell said, noting that part of his goal was
to present a plan that would serve the county’s needs
for the next four decades.
Cullen said while he understood the county’s need for a
jail, a property tax increase would be a tough sell to
the public. Shaver has estimated that $5 million amounts
to a 2 1/2 cent increase to the tax rate. County
officials have long contended that either renovating the
current jail or building a new facility will require a
tax hike.
“I understand that we’re probably stuck with just a
jail, but I wanted for a minute to look down the road
and say, ‘If we really wanted something to last 40 years
that could serve all purposes and keep everything under
one roof there it is’,” he said. “I realized coming in
here this wasn’t going to fly, but I wanted you to see
it, and 40 years down the road someone’s going to say,
‘Well, we should have listened to Russell Johnson back
then and built it’.”
Satterfield said he did not think the commission would
approve any of the options currently on the table.
“There’s no way to build anything without a tax increase
right now,” he said. “I think any of these plans will
pass commission muster on an up or down vote to build
one of them.”
He asked Russell what would happen if the county does
not renovate the jail.
“When the feds come in and take over, that would be the
(main) problem,” Russell said. “How close we are to
that? I’m saying that we are.”
Satterfield floated the idea of taking no action on the
jail. According to county officials, allowing the
facility to remain decertified will open the county up
for potential litigation.
“And then you’ll have the judge come in and say you’re
going to build that $31 million (jail) or you’re going
to be fined for it,” Davis said.
Shaver said a potential mandate from a judge “changes
everything.”
“When you go and look at the taxpayer and say, ‘Hey the
judicial branch has come along and taken the authority
out of the legislative branch, and we now have no
choice.’ … To jump up and voluntarily do it when … we
don’t even know really which one (plan) it’ll be, that’s
a lot different political sale.”
“But why pay $60,000 and $75,000 for feasibility studies
when you don’t do what they recommend?” Davis said about
the jail panel.
Near the end of the lengthy discussion, Satterfield
considered disbanding the jail committee altogether.
Davis sharply disagreed with that suggestion.
“I’m sorry I’m upset, but you’re talking about just
getting rid of all this work,” Davis said. “It’s
thousands of dollars that’s been done. When I’ve got
officers going in there (with a) 50-to-2
(inmate-to-jailer ratio), you’re not the ones who have
to go to the family and say they’ve been beat up or
they’re in the hospital or they’re on disability. I do.
I’ve got to go to these homes at night where these
houses have been broken into and say that guy should
have been in jail, but he’s not. I take that serious.
That’s my charge; that’s my job. That’s what you pay me
for is to make sure these citizens know these people
breaking these laws that he (Russell) prosecutes are in
jail where they need to be, not out here on probation.”
He said the jail committee worked “tirelessly” to make
progress on renovation plans.
“We take it very serious because we’re the ones
responsible,” Davis said. “You’re responsible for the
money; we’re responsible the safety of this community.
If you’re just turning people out then we’re just
spinning our wheels for nothing.”
Russell and Commission Chairman Steve Harrelson agreed
that the jail committee will reconvene and vote to
recommend one option to present to commission.
In other business, commission considered forming ad hoc
committees to address a plan to potentially sell Matlock
Bend Landfill to a private entity and add a surcharge to
the tipping fee to mitigate anticipated shortfalls in
the closure and post-closure care of the landfill.