The DeKalb County Commission held a town hall meeting just before its Jail Committee session on Monday, March 18, which allowed local residents to ask questions and voice their concerns over a proposed new Judicial Center and Jail. With the main battle cry from the public as, “Not in My Back Yard,” the committee is still struggling to find a site for the project, but a solution may have presented itself. The question of whether the facility could be built on the existing location of the jail was answered with designers saying that it is possible.
Local residents were given three minutes to ask questions and offer comments about the proposed justice center, including Steven Cantrell, who questioned the need for a full justice center.
“We need a jail and the Tennessee Corrections Institute has told us what we need at a minimum. Our jail operation can maintain state certification as long as the county continues to make measurable progress under a master plan of action. A justice center is not required, but it is an additional tax burden that this committee and mayor have proposed putting on the taxpayers of DeKalb County,” said Cantrell.
“We need to focus on what TCI has recommended as the minimum to meet standards due to the other challenges facing the county and its taxpayers. We need a jail, not a justice center,” Cantrell continued.
“As for concerns about the courts and security of the courthouse, there is an easy solution, which would be less of an impact on the taxpayers of DeKalb County. Turn the courthouse into the county courthouse it was dedicated to be in 1970, and as engraved on the outside of the building, and move all non-judicial county offices to the county complex unless there is a legal reason they are required to be in the courthouse: County Executive, Veterans Office, Election Commission, THP Office.”
“Secure the courthouse just like other courthouses are done in many parts of Tennessee with one security entrance and one secure exit. All other doors would be alarmed as fire doors. Understanding that we already have two magnetometers on the third floor, we could move these to a single entrance. And since all offices remaining in the courthouse would be judicial in nature, in theory, this would reduce the number of visitors and provide security for the courts.”
“This would not require a judicial center and we could get back to focusing on the real priority here, which is a new jail to meet this county’s requirements and be in line with TCI recommendations. And it would respect the county taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars in the process,” Cantrell concluded.
But county officials, including Sheriff Patrick Ray, explained that the current courthouse was not designed for the security requirements that are needed today, and that walking inmates across a parking lot to the courthouse is dangerous to the public as well as the inmates. There are also concerns inside the courthouse as to security, where and how inmates are held during court, and how to totally secure the building.
While the ideal scenario would be to build a brand-new Justice Center, with a connected jail and courtrooms, many say the county can not afford such a facility. And the location would be another factor.
At a meeting in February, John Eisenlau of Treanor HL Architects and Rick Bruining of Bell Construction unveiled the county’s requested estimates for a 150, 190, and 225-bed facility. With those options, the projected cost of a judicial center would be from $57,317,500 for a 150-bed jail with no shell space for future expansion to $70,317,500 for a 225-bed facility, not including the cost of property, which according to guidelines must be inside the city limits of Smithville. Proposed locations for the facility have come under fire for either being too expensive or receiving backlash from the public who do not want a new jail close to a residential area.
At the February meeting, after receiving a bit of sticker shock at the cost of the project, county commissioners asked the architect to look at building the proposed facility existing jail location.
At last week’s meeting, Eisenlau addressed the board and laid out preliminary designs for a judicial center at the current Sheriff’s Department location, saying the design would need to be at least four-stories, built adjacent to the east side of the current jail annex building. With the four-story design, 225 inmates could be housed. Once the jail is completed, Eisenlau said the current facility would be torn down and a new justice center could then be added at the site.
Eisenlau said there would not be room to add parking for the facility, with the site having to use current parking on the town square.
The plan could be done in phases, building lower floors of the jail while leaving upper shell floors for expansion. The Sheriff’s Department would move into the upper floors, as the courtroom portion was constructed.
Officials say more studies need to be done to get an accurate design, noting setback requirements from property lines from the city, as well as soil studies of the site. A staffing study would also need to be looked into to see how many employees would be needed to staff the design.
Opponents say that building on the existing site would not provide room for future expansion, but others pointed out that the current Veterans Building could be demolished, providing additional building space.
“This new jail is roughly 71,000 square feet,” Eisenlau said. “If you choose to do so, you could build a new structure on this property either one story, two stories, three stories, or four stories tall. How the guts of the building would work we would have to consult with the sheriff on that but numerically if you take 225 inmates and multiply them by 350 gross square feet per detainee which is the industry standard and you stack that number on four floors believe it or not, it fits and the sheriff can continue to operate right where he is although it would be extremely disruptive to build next to him but you could build this building next to the sheriff.”
“The interesting take away is that it is conceivable that you could build on your current location with the building itself on one level and the housing units with mezzanines above it. This would basically be a three-story building on top of the first level, which I will call the basement, but right now its technically a four-story building which is in compliance with the building codes that allow you to go up to 75 feet from the fire department connection to the top accessible level of the building,” said Eisenlau.
