[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6159298,"mediaKeyId","5455608-90a5b084a10a04d21dc5549aa8d74602","parentId",5455608,"title","Supervisors press for court and probation coordination after CHIN planning report; jail population spikes cited","audioSeconds",1523,"startMs",1437000,"endMs",2960000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5455608-90a5b084a10a04d21dc5549aa8d74602&start=1437&end=2960","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5455608-90a5b084a10a04d21dc5549aa8d74602/thumbnail_1437000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6159298/Cochise-County/Arizona/Supervisors-press-for-court-and-probation-coordination-after-CHIN-planning-report-jail-population-spikes-cited","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6159298-b917ee7f35facc29a51cc79f8b4616e3/orig.mp4?Expires=1773591646&Signature=Qg7mhZ5BnKm2YrhU6S85C2ZSa4pY4TCvRb8moK0dLdrZ2HmjCPOFQmgvGRkQahF23yjZwiq5tWhbLPjisdSbXPsBU9Jryx1ub3K6TaJZydZvnrEzG6pcF7ScNO6pYo4FeSrgFcb09sJuoty1dOM2EEcPuvnNj2kT1ziBBh9TyJPQQMgvebdePhH7JLTvRFmKqgLKgDDdJX-l7aEc7dAPPPsBBhXoxsp5DkmKzuEITfgZceHnSuBXstvTdjvDIvc4md9E2OsBRVLOuUHE8GI-aKETv9L8lo9GKDtIrPVbmeioCQmdVdB8oc9HOBoCgGBNWy6~L~w74-1S13bjadqewQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Cochise County, AZ ","date","2025-07-23T22:52:58.527Z","article","Supervisors on July 23 returned repeatedly to the county’s recent planning study (referred to in the meeting as the CHIN planning report) and asked staff and Banner to lead a coordinated effort with the courts, probation and other justice-system stakeholders to test the study’s assumptions and identify operational steps that could reduce jail population demand.

Supervisor Sebastian Gomez and other board members said the CHIN report contained recommendations — including diversion, probation and court-process changes — that, if implemented, could reduce the number of beds needed. Banner and county staff agreed that judicial and probation stakeholders must be invited into planning discussions so the county can assess what is “feasible” operationally and what effects changes would have on the built environment and timeline.

Sheriff’s Office representatives (including Commander Bradshaw) confirmed that inmate populations have remained steady and that probation violators constitute a notable portion of bookings; meeting participants noted that the sheriff’s office does not unilaterally decide probation-related incarcerations. Banner said the project should be master-planned for future expansion while meeting immediate needs; presenters suggested designing durable core infrastructure (e.g., kitchen and medical capacity) to support higher future populations while phasing initial bed counts to the county’s current averages.

Why this matters: The number of beds designed into a new facility affects cost, site layout, program space, and long-term operating expenses. If county stakeholders can reduce future demand through diversion programs or procedural changes, the county may be able to build a smaller initial phase and expand later.

Board members asked that Banner and county administration lead cross-stakeholder meetings with the presiding judge, probation, the County Attorney and the sheriff to review the CHIN recommendations and to produce a plan that identifies achievable operational changes and timelines. Banner said it would include analysis of operational impacts in its early 90-day work plan. No formal decisions were made at the work session about changing the bed count; board members emphasized monthly reporting on jail population as a monitoring tool.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","20250723 Jail District Work Session Vanir Rep Presentation","oneSentenceSummary","Board members and Banner urged simultaneous judicial-system engagement to validate planning-study assumptions and identify diversion or probation strategies that could reduce bed demand before construction.","taxTitle","Cochise County, Arizona","taxId",27859,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6159302,"Board plans publicity schedule as county refines $120M–$130M jail budget; bond size, state grant noted",345,5591000,5936000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5455608-90a5b084a10a04d21dc5549aa8d74602&start=5591&end=5936","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5455608-90a5b084a10a04d21dc5549aa8d74602/thumbnail_5591000.jpg","/articles/6159302/Cochise-County/Arizona/Board-plans-publicity-schedule-as-county-refines-120M130M-jail-budget-bond-size-state-grant-noted","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6159302-b9e4a795af04409434ae2f057873d4fa/orig.mp4?Expires=1773591646&Signature=kNi47ueOJCSw5zIb9-jTiBBVoY~fSk8LpbWP2TYIVcKrXY7LzhmGu5swUqgwE9kWAa68hq0R6Nwk91xl-U6VSHZdyuQhmAKcJlFs4psKD1byfTSrTbpo9AMc-eOXgPTfU7mEMfenpetn3bDs255gjwyEfzQeiRdZMEPfpt5pVNE2EtAu2kBSLsslarVRKObJazzR4NihuycjD3I--WfRYIzcV4NnNw2fDlQgicFxDU~V5O-9S3E7KbsMKm14KIriG-eRsf5eUb8jgw5qQhWgs5MieXnrRt21ZlvlzzLomQ5OY8hEnqcshdtG5MoIVQ6tbFLmVb6aXb4rrWs6WNi6kA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Cochise County supervisors on July 23 discussed financing assumptions for the proposed jail replacement, urging staff to produce conservative figures and a milestone schedule suitable for the election publicity pamphlet.

County staff told the board there is roughly $10 million currently available from an existing tax collection, and the county expects a $20 million state contribution if the project proceeds. That combination would reduce the bond amount the county would need to issue. Board members and Banner presenters discussed a planning baseline of about $120 million, with some speakers describing a total planning range up to $130 million; the county emphasized that the bond amount presented to voters should be clearly explained and, if possible, as low as feasible.

Board members repeatedly asked for a simple milestone schedule — program/requirements, RFP for architects, design period, contractor selection, construction start and anticipated ribbon-cutting — that could be included in the publicity pamphlet mailed to voters. Banner said its 90-day plan would deliver project controls, a draft milestone/phasing schedule and procurement documents needed to move quickly if voters approve funding. The county clerk’s office is preparing the publicity pamphlet; staff said the pro/con arguments deadline is Aug. 6 and that early- August publication schedules require concise, verifiable cost and schedule statements.

Why this matters: Because the county intends to ask voters to approve a bond or reauthorize tax measures to fund a new jail, the accuracy, presentation and timing of cost and schedule numbers in the publicity pamphlet can shape public perception and voting outcomes. Supervisors explicitly sought numbers that reflect likely costs but are not inflated by avoidable contingencies.

Speakers noted that contingencies and procurement choices affect the bond amount. Banner described owner and contractor contingencies and said a well-managed procurement can reduce the chance of later change orders; board members said any ballot materials must state whether the figure is a project budget or the bond ask, and must make clear how much existing local funds and expected state contributions will reduce the bond request. The board did not set a final bond amount at the work session; staff said they would prepare materials and return with a scope and proposed contract at the Aug. 5 meeting.","Officials discussed using an initial reserve, a state funding contribution and a bond to finance the jail. Board members pressed for a clear, conservative cost figure for the election publicity pamphlet and asked Banner to provide a milestone schedule for outreach.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6159307,"County chooses Banner as preferred owner’s representative; staff to return scope, fee for Aug. 5 approval",3524,88000,3612000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5455608-90a5b084a10a04d21dc5549aa8d74602&start=88&end=3612","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5455608-90a5b084a10a04d21dc5549aa8d74602/thumbnail_88000.jpg","/articles/6159307/Cochise-County/Arizona/County-chooses-Banner-as-preferred-owners-representative-staff-to-return-scope-fee-for-Aug-5-approval","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6159307-257b57475616055a5133518f7f1e3314/orig.mp4?Expires=1773591646&Signature=l9-Cs7H31oXxRxOCgG2ERXA1SxaofI1-2vfipv~N3CDpG7w1bIA~WX~8zpyEJW-mE1HSA4pktrp46K3XwvVvkNgfZQ7NMQIKifhQ7WN2MOfO~Eo8P~uvc1uRhbJAYm7ZjPP34OGIbNhnCEFyf902Mc6GbgVDGhxyXFl-q8EXu0HJ5pUjZZQSm0AHqvXV61brCl--xqOo0k72kVMhpRNDE-APQj9NvonpI~7xGuO8j1GNdj1CT2nNvZmVXX6r5P8JNCT5p0d2wZTiWXHP4lt-7pIMZy7Pf-wXT~-4lCxUeiFyqw4kl5f33itGvVRjxnp6KiYu8eRCH50ba~3SV1ouaQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Cochise County officials on July 23 identified Banner (presented as VANR/Banner) as the preferred owner’s representative for the county’s proposed jail replacement and asked staff to return a final scope and fee for board approval at the Aug. 5 meeting.

Banner representatives delivered an overview of their credentials, a 90-day startup action plan and options for construction delivery methods. Cody Newsom, who introduced himself as “the mountain region area manager for VANR” and said “I will be your principal in charge for the new jail project,” described Banner as a minority-woman-owned program, project and construction management firm with specialized justice experience and nationwide projects. Mike Bieber, introduced as the firm’s project director, and Shannon Lobdell, introduced as project manager, outlined services Banner would perform as an owner’s representative, including project controls, risk registers, budget management and stakeholder coordination.

The firm presented a 90-day action plan that it said would finalize roles, validate the CHIN planning report, establish executive reporting and prepare procurement documents for design teams and contractors. Banner recommended early risk mitigation, a living project-management plan and a layered contingency structure (contractor contingencies within a guaranteed maximum price plus an owner contingency) to manage escalation and unknowns. The firm also described three delivery methods the county could use — traditional design-bid-build, construction-manager-at-risk (CMAR) and design-build — and the tradeoffs for schedule, cost control and owner input.

Discussion at the meeting emphasized that the county’s procurement choices must follow state law governing qualifications-based selection and county procurement codes. Sharon Gilman, Cochise County administrator, said the selection process followed the required qualifications-based approach and that, if the board directed, staff would bring a scope of work and fee proposal back for formal approval. Banner’s presenters said a realistic programing and design schedule for a roughly $120 million program could allow 12–15 months for programming and design and construction start in about 18–24 months, depending on delivery method and final scope.

Board members asked Banner to prepare a high-level milestone/phasing schedule suitable for inclusion in the election publicity pamphlet and for public outreach. Banner said its 90-day plan would produce the project controls and milestone schedule that would help the county move “quickly” if voters approved funding. The board did not sign a contract at the work session; staff said they would return a final scope/fee for board action at the Aug. 5 meeting.

Why this matters: An owner’s representative acts as an owner-side advocate through planning, design, procurement and construction; selecting one signals the county’s move from planning toward procurement and project delivery. The vendor’s choice of delivery method and the allocation of contingencies will affect schedule, risk and how firms price guaranteed maximum prices or proposals.

Banner’s presentation included specific examples of prior jail and public-safety projects, which the firm said inform its recommendations about durability, operations-driven design and staging for future expansion. Board members stressed transparency, frequent reporting and stakeholder coordination (including the sheriff’s office and court system) as central to the owner’s-rep role. The county will decide whether to approve a contract at the Aug. 5 board meeting.","After a qualifications-based selection, Banner presented its role, a 90-day startup plan and delivery-method options for Cochise County’s proposed jail replacement. County staff said they will bring a contract scope and fee to the board for consideration at the Aug. 5 meeting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Supervisors press for court and probation coordination after CHIN planning report; jail population spikes cited

Board plans publicity schedule as county refines $120M–$130M jail budget; bond size, state grant noted

County chooses Banner as preferred owner’s representative; staff to return scope, fee for Aug. 5 approval