Stutsman: The next item on the agenda is just a discussion regarding the jail overcrowding. I wonder if it would be appropriate to take just a short break before we move on. What does everybody want to do?

Jordahl: I’d like to ask a question in the context of this regional jail concept about the number estimates. But we can do that when we come back just to be easily.

Stutsman: Well, I just want a consensus from the group. Do we want to take a break or do we want to keep going?

Jordahl: A break’s good.

Stutsman: OK. Why don’t we take a 7-minute break; come back about 10 of.

Hayek: Sally, how much longer do you anticipate this going?

Stutsman: You tell me.

Hayek: I was just wondering. Maybe we could, if we’re going to have a 20-minute discussion or something like that, maybe we just keep going.

Stutsman: OK.

Hayek: That way folks don’t have to…

Stutsman: That’s fine with me, if that’s what…

Hayek: If that’s OK.

Jordahl: That’s OK. This gentleman’s name again?

Stutsman: John Cain.

Jordahl: John Cain.

Cain: Yes?

Jordahl: Mr. Cain or Bob or Pete, whatever, in looking at these inmate population projections, we hear in part of this, looking at this thing, we’ve heard about what happened to Black Hawk County, that they built a new jail. They’re thinking, yes, we’ll pay for this thing with all these rentals. Then, there’s a pent up demand in the legal system, that the judges are putting more people in jail because they know that there is space available, more people being arrested because they know that some of them will be done with them. I wonder if there has been any assessment of the pent up demand in Johnson County.

Hayek: Well, I can answer that a little bit. In talking to Chief Winklehake, in the service club he belongs to that I presented to, questions were asked about basically the complaint from one of the people there about the high rate of arrests. Why don’t you, Chief, stop arresting everybody for… Stop arresting every intoxicated person your officers run into. His response was that we certainly cannot run into an intoxicated person, whether he or she is driving or walking or whatever they’re doing, and then no do something if they are in really terrible condition. Because then they’re going to hurt themselves, they’re going to hurt somebody else and then we’re going to get sued for letting them go on about their business in that kind of state. I got the impression from talking to him that if we had more jail cells available, its not going to affect what they do out there during the daytime and nighttime as far as arresting people. I got no impression that would be the case at all from my dealings with the Sheriff’s Department from the standpoint of being on the Civil Service Commission for 18 years or whatever and my dealing with Chief Winklehake. Frankly, as a former police officer myself, I never considered whether or not the County was going to be able to put up someone that I was dealing with on the street, deciding whether or not to arrest.

Jordahl: What happened in Black Hawk then?

Hayek: Well, I think Black Hawk did not design for the year 2019 and they built a big facility and now I understand they’re full and they’re landlocked, or they’re not landlocked but they can’t expand on that site. So, they’re in big trouble I think.

Carpenter: They’re pretty much right downtown in the middle of things.

Hayek: Middle of town.

Carpenter: Black Hawk County had… I think their crime rate was a little higher than ours, too. The unfortunate thing is they went out and promised the taxpayers that if we build it, we’ll help pay for it by the revenue being brought back in through the rental of cells, but they didn’t have time to do too much of that because the courts didn’t fill them up. It was unfortunate because I would suspect that if we were to build a facility here; however, I’m not going to get out and say that’s what we’re going to do. We’re certainly going to do everything in our power to help pay for this project, but again, that depends on what the courts do, too.

Jordahl: Yes. You’re talking about talking to Chief Winklehake and you’re talking about your experiences as a police officer yourself, but you weren’t talking about what the courts might do. Do we have any sense of that?

Hayek: Right. Well, again, Judge Gerard, I think, commented to the Committee that he is certainly happy to put people on home detention who qualify for it, but he is not going to do that with someone who he feels is a risk. I think there was an example not too long ago of someone who did re-offend while they were on home detention, in a violent manner, which was unfortunate. I didn’t get the impression from Judge Gerard that he would be any stricter or less strict with regard to his sentencing if there was a facility that would hold the number of people available. I don’t know. That’s my impression.

Carpenter: We have waiting lists right now for those who are sentenced to do a certain period of time that are not violent people, waiting to find an opening for a bed in a facility now.

Jordahl: A non-violent person can wait. I’m reaching…

Carpenter: Well, you can’t do that of course.

Jordahl: But, what is the… I just think we have this example of Black Hawk that has been frequently held out as a kind of a counter-example to what we should do. We shouldn’t expect that we’re going to be able to pay for it. All right. Well, shouldn’t we expect that the same thing that happened there in terms of growth of the prison population in response to available space will also happen here.

Carpenter: Well, I think that Dave and Duane, you were up there. I didn’t make the trip that day. But wasn’t Black Hawk’s, the number of inmates they have, wasn’t that higher when they built than what ours is now at the present time. Or do you know? Their facility now is about the size of what’s projected for us, the way I understand. Is that correct?

Lewis: That was my belief Bob, but I don’t remember specifically. That they had a much larger backlog than they didn’t anticipate. When they built their building (inaudible).

Jones: The other thing you got to be really careful about in comparing Black Hawk is realize this, what’s gone in their own economy and what was it the last year. What counties in the state of Iowa grew. Black Hawk, my understanding, is not one of them that grew at 10%. Black Hawk’s got a couple of other projects that have gone on over there in the last decade that ended up kind of in a… had similar problems. They built too large of a sewage treatment facility or too large of a water purification facility. Deere and Company’s reduced in size. Other companies have left Waterloo. So, I’d be really careful about looking at Black Hawk County and using it as a comparison.

Jordahl: Well, I don’t want to suggest that that’s the basis of any statistical thinking, is that we need to think, OK, if that happened there, then the same percentage of something is going to happen here. But, we’re in the presence of a jail consultant here, an architect who has dealt with this and you folks have spoken with people who are experts in the field. Of course, if you are looking at this problem, isn’t this a phenomenon that’s more widespread than Black Hawk County. If it’s not, then let’s not worry about it.

Kemp: Jonathan, I think there’s another mitigating factor, though. That is, we’ve projected part of this on the legislative actions and what they have done in the past. Now, whether that will continue at that rate, that’s an important variable. Secondly, it seems and I know Waterloo, well, since that’s my home. I have gone to the jail recently and I’ve checked the population. One of the things that I sense has helped them is the Bosnian population. They’re very law abiding.

Stutsman: Excuse me. Could we ask you to take your cell phone call outside, please, thank you.

Kemp: The second thing is that…

Jordahl: I didn’t catch that word Professor Kemp. What other population?

Thompson: The Bosnians.

Simpson: Bosnians.

Jordahl: Oh, the Bosnian population.

Kemp: The Bosnian population, yes, which is one of those variable that happens to towns. The second thing that can well happen that is different from Waterloo are the populations coming into a city. We’ve mentioned Chicago later. Our population is not comparable to the kinds of people who for awhile at least flooded parts of Chicago. We have to really know about our population base, who are coming in during the next 10 years or whatever that might be. I always say these things because sometimes we get kind of carried away and then we have to start thinking are there other things that we ought to be able to consider. I don’t think it’s a question right now of jail or no jail. I think that’s a moot point at this time. The question is, when we start figuring cost and size and so on and I think there are circumstances that would make us look foolish either way. I’m talking about being terribly under, our projection now, maybe being terribly under. I’m not certain that that’s all true, that it will continue to rise to some level. I don’t question that at all. I don’t want us to rush to judgement though about things.

Jordahl: I could put the concern in another way. We could talk about the estimate of the number needed to be fit in 2019 as one way of looking at it. But, we could also ask why we are not asking about 2040 and how is this facility going to be fit for that. Why are we thinking in terms of 20 years and not 100. There are other ways of asking the same question.

Kemp: Well, Pete has certainly talked about that at our Committee meetings. Not only that we don’t get embarrassed 20 years from now in having to build a new one. But what about 40 years or 60 years or whatever it might be? Certainly the Committee addressed that particular concern. That’s one of the reasons why the facility, the placement of this jail, present, is probably not one that is going to be a particularly viable one for the future. It just has too many limitations to it to think about those kind of 20, 40 or 40, 60, 80 year kind of projections. We certainly don’t know all of the things that are going to happen to our city. We can make some kind of estimates about our population. But, all those there are a lot of dependant factors.

Jordahl: But, I don’t think anybody is predicting that it’s going to shrink.

Osland: Jonathan, I think you’ve got to take… We’ve hired a consultant here to take the best input data that he can and come up with the best recommendation. There is no guarantee that anything we do, you, I or anybody in this room does, that is going to be 100% right 10 years from now. So we got to take the best data we have and I think we got some good data. Lots of things, as Mr. Kemp said and I think Marty said, play into what happens down the road. We got kind of a neat community here. Yes, the crime rate is so and so. But, lots of things play into it. If we get a packing plant, comes into this town, for instance, that can change your community immediately as far as the inmate population concerns. It’s happened in many communities that I am aware of. Some communities are fighting right now. They don’t want the new beef plant because of that and it taxes all of your facilities. Black Hawk County has a situation where I think they’ve had a pretty high unemployment rate up there. That plays into your inmate population. So, fortunately, I don’t think we got that situation now and who knows what will happen 10 years down the road. If we get that situation, all of these things are blown out of the water. So, we just have to base it on the best data we have available I think.

Jordahl: I’m trying to pose my questions based on the data that are being presented and I’m not trying to hypothesize other data. I’m interested in what Marilyn might have to say.

Wright: There is a couple of things that I took out of being on the Committee and all along, one of the points that Bob made, that I think is really important here is that regardless of whether we’re like Black Hawk County or not- there are some similarities, there are a bunch that aren’t- they didn’t plan well. We have the opportunity not to do that. The big point that I took out of that was that it would be easy for a group of people to jump on a bandwagon that says, oh, let’s pay for the jail this way. He’s cautioned us about doing this like Black Hawk did. We just simply can’t do that. It would be very nice and it sounds like you’ll be very accommodating, if we can do that early on. But, we can’t assume that. The other thing is that when we talk to Judge Gerard and we talk to Steve Strief from Criminal Correctional Services, there is no reason to believe, based on their projections, and they’re in a really good position to project, I’m figuring, legislatively. Like Sally spoke about, that column is going to find its way to this community, regardless of what happens in Iowa City and Johnson County. That is going to come our way. There is no question about it. That trend may end in some period of time, but for the perceivable future certainly, community corrections is what is going to happen. This whole plan, I’m very impressed with, because it allows for that.

Jordahl: But, does it allow for enough of it?

Wright: It sounds like it does to me.

Stutsman: We need to move this.

Jones: The siting is going to have a lot to deal with that. They want to mention the site.

Stutsman: We need to keep this discussion moving along and I don’t want to fixate on any one particular issue. We’ve been here for 2 hours now. We’ve had some very good information and input. I want to throw it open to any of the Board Members or any of the Committee Members for any final points before we move on to public discussion.

Slockett: Well, I noticed one thing wasn’t discussed at all is the staffing and the cost of the new jail, what those would be.

Carpenter: Well, until we get the size of the jail and get it all figured into place and how it’s set up, I have no idea what the staffing would be.

Stutsman: Carol just reminded me that’s up for our 3rd informational meeting, so I think that will be addressed, Tom, maybe not today, but it definitely will be addressed.

Jones: The Committee discussed it. There were projections that were put out there and it’s rather striking. That’s one of the problems with expanding the existing jail is, in order to meet the numbers you ended up with this god awful addition, it was all vertical, and you didn’t end up getting into any of the cost savings. At the same time, your newer facilities were safer, but your older ones are still there. The safety issue is a very serious issue.

Hayek: Maybe I’m carrying this too far. But, I noticed the Oneida County facility is like a 200-bed capacity, roughly. 200-bed, which is more than twice the size of our facility. I think they’re staffed by about 25 correctional people. Johnson County, for a 92 bed facility requires about 20. So, I mean, for 5 more staffing people, they’ve been able to handle a facility more than double the size of our capacity. So, the design makes a huge difference.

Kemp: There was a man from Colorado who mentioned that, too. Because you could do by… segregate it by the (inaudible). He made a lot of sense, the way he described it. I think it makes it clear that, unlike the University when it opens a new building, where the costs do escalate, you can be pretty certain of how those costs are going to escalate. That wasn’t true, this new proposal. I thought it was a very impressive part of that (inaudible) presentation.

Carpenter: Sally, the only comment I’d like to make is that the Jail Inspector that sent you this letter in January, he’s no longer on staff. They haven’t, the last I knew, they hadn’t appointed a new one yet. The State’s position could change.

Stutsman: That’s a good point.

Carpenter: So, I don’t know where we stand. They haven’t been in to visit us yet, but I’m certainly not going to have them come in and talk to us. We won’t invite them anyway. We don’t know where we’re at there on that now.

Stutsman: All right. Pete, did you have…

Hayek: No. That’s it.

Stutsman: Oh. I thought you… Bob Simpson I think has…

Simpson: I would only comment (inaudible) respect. I think the need for an enlarged capacity to serve prisoners in Johnson County was very immediately found. The data tends to overwhelm. The only question that pertains is the size and how that inner space is configured. There is an assumption that the largest number of persons to be served would be those who would be non-violent in nature and the crimes would be minimal. I think that you had, Dwight, had indicated about 50% or perhaps it was over 50%, of the space would be dedicated to those particular types of individuals.

?: 40%.

Simpson: 40%. The largest single component of space. I guess I have no question about the need, but it is in those interior designs that I think we have to be very careful about. We’re not building something that we can be loose about at all. These are people who are coming to us under the direst of circumstances. I think our ultimate, our ultimate challenge is to do this, in a situation as politically unpopular as it may turn out to be, do this in a humane and civil fashion, because these people after all, are our guests while they are in that facility. I would take my hat off to Sheriff Carpenter for the materials that have been presented to the Committee. He has been excellent in providing answers to almost every question that is posed.

Stutsman: OK.

Carpenter: I’d like to answer Bob. Thanks Bob for the compliment, but also, I think in the other pod for the maximum it really does minimize also. I don’t think we lose from going from one category to another in being able to take care of those people with the less amount of personnel. Go from the medium, maximum or minimum, whatever you want, you basically use the same personnel. I really think the new style on this system is going to really save us money as far as personnel costs.

Stutsman: OK. I think at this point I’d like to open it up for public discussion, comments, questions. Once again, if people do have comments, if they could introduce themselves first before they address either the Board or the Committee.

Slockett: I had a quick question while people were thinking maybe. It’s just an informational point about the linear design problems. I just have a recollection that a lot of attention was given to the video cameras in the new control center in the Jail when it was first developed. That wasn’t mentioned. Were they found to be ineffective or they aren’t aimed in the right places or just someone comment on that because I just (inaudible).

Carpenter: Well, number 1, there wasn’t nearly enough of them put in to start with. Over the years, there has been added. But, you still got to have sight visibility. The cameras can only do so much. Too many blind spots, Tom.

Maupin: If you could see this jail that we saw at Rhinelander, it’s a beautiful thing. One person can sit in the middle to watch 100 people. It’s amazing.

Stutsman: No obstruction at all?

Maupin: Well, you can’t see everything, but you can see what they’re doing. You can just turn and see everything. It’s beautiful. With the cameras in addition to it, one person can really supervise 100 people. It’s amazing. Compared to this, it’s like a 1970 Ford pickup versus a year 2000.

Slockett: One additional point and I don’t want to talk too much, but I feel obligated to say, and probably other people all feel the same way, but points about the security of the deputies were all made here several times and I for one would encourage Sheriff Carpenter to take whatever steps are necessary to protect his men and of course the prisoners as well. I hope that he wouldn’t let whatever situation interfere with that as being a top priority of his. I’m certain the Board will support whatever it takes to make sure that that’s the case.

Stutsman: We need to break for just a second. Andy needs to change the tape. So, hold that thought. To add to your comment, Tom, I agree completely with what you say. I was at a presentation that Pete made to a group and talked about the safety issue and it didn’t come home to me until he pointed out how scary that is to have an incident in a cell block and for a deputy to go in there and they have to go in there unarmed and not knowing what you are going to get into. I’m sure Dave Wagner, who is Chief Deputy in the Jail can speak to that. I don’t think I’d care to be in that position and it is pretty scary. When you think about it in those terms, safety is a real issue.

Hayek: It really is, and I think from a liability standpoint, anytime something could happen that would be pretty devastating as far as a prisoner getting assaulted and seriously injured and be able to at least come forth with a claim that it was overcrowded, that the current standards were not met and that led to his or her injuries. I can see this happening, because it is unsafe. It is unsafe, for the deputies in particular. Well, we had one example where Bob brought to the Committee a paintball that was found in a search, that a prisoner had scraped paint off of the walls or the beds or wherever the paint was in the jail and was able to fashion this solid softball size paintball, that probably weighed 3 pounds, easily, that you could insert in a sock and use as a weapon in a very serious injury causing kind of a thing. If you can’t see them they’re going to be doing something or they can do something that they shouldn’t be doing and that’s why safety is so much better with these podular designs where you can look around and observe what everybody is doing. Except for the modesty area, that’s a little bit screened for that purpose, but you can still see or detect if assaultive conduct was going on or whatever. So, there are a lot of reasons that this is not adequate. The money issue, gee whiz. When you look at the money this is going to cost the taxpayer, if we don’t do it. When I’ve talked to people and they see that issue, that this is not something we have a choice about, we’re going to pay a lot now to build this, but we’re going to pay an awful lot more later if we don’t. $15 million it looks like would accumulate in bed rentals without transportation in less than 10 years.

Maupin: At the end of that time we’d have nothing.

Hayek: We’d have a brand new facility that was paid for.

Jordahl: Later doesn’t start in 15 years. Later starts as soon as we get that next letter from the Department of Corrections.

Hayek: Exactly.

Jordahl: The State Jail Inspector.

Carpenter: Before I decide it’s not safe for the deputies. That could happen sooner, too.

Jordahl: I’m saying, we’re talking about $1 million a year, not the $650,000 that the graph shows, starting as soon as this current fiscal year. That’s just insurmountable. The reality of that is huge.

Maupin: Speaking of the taxpayer, if we don’t do this we’re going to get murdered. We’re going to just really catch it, so we got to do it. I don’t like to finance it anymore than anyone else does, but the alternative is just harder.

Ruth: I, as a resident of the rural area, really resent all the political implications of this and the library on the same ballot. These 2 items are completely different. You can go to the library if you want. But, when somebody goes to the Jail, it’s because a group of people has said that what they have done is wrong. So, we’re not even talking the same thing. This Jail needs built. Bob needs the staff to do it. We have excellent people. We interviewed lots of people when we did this and my mind was changed, Jonathan, you were there Mike, am I correct in your name? When he made a statement about, right off the bat when he started about the safety and the long term of the employees. So, we have what it takes. It’s time we figure out creatively how to finance it.

Maupin: Don’t vote no.

Stutsman: Any other final comments? I just wanted to inform people that we are going to have 2 more informational meetings on the Jail issue and those will be scheduled for August 3rd at 1:00 in the Board Room and that will be another joint work session where we will talk more about site selection from that work group. Then again on August 10th, there will be another joint work session with the Jail Finance Consultant, and that, too will be at 1:00 in the Board Room. Those 2 sessions, as well as this one, will be videotaped. The videotaping is available to those people that have cable access. For the rural members or people in the community…

Videographer Andy Small: They can check them out from the Public Library.

Stutsman: OK. We do have a copy up here in the Board Room. It’s at Coralville and the Iowa City Public Library?

Small: Just the Iowa City Public Library.

Stutsman: Iowa City Public Library. Those tapes are available at the AV desk if people are interested in checking those out.

Small: I can provide an extra set for Coralville if you guys want to send one out there.

Stutsman: OK.

Small: It’s no problem.

Stutsman: OK. All right. Why don’t we plan to do that, so people can have access to this information if they are interested in doing that.

Thompson: Also, we will be voting next Thursday, at our formal agenda, on the outcome of this meeting whether we think the new jail is needed. So, if people want to contract us between now and then they have an opportunity to do that.

Stutsman: OK. Well, I thank everybody for their diligence and their tremendous work on this project. I can’t say enough of the Steering Committee and for all of the volunteer time that they have put in on this effort. I’m speaking for not only the Board, but for the community. We really do appreciate all of your time.

Hayek: You appointed an excellent Committee. They’ve just been great people to work with.

Stutsman: I can tell. It is wonderful to see a committee that works well together and is really willing to make the commitment and get something done. So, it’s been terrific. Any other comments from Board Members or anyone else? If not, thank you again and we are adjourned.

Adjourned at 3:12 p.m.

Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor

By: Meghan McCoy, Recording Secretary