The Vanport County Commission voted Sept. 2 to withhold approval of a proposed contract with the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation after commissioners objected to a clause saying inmates could be released to the "Grand Forks area." The motion not to sign passed on a roll-call vote.

Commissioners said the clause in question — part of a release-plan provision — would let the state place people who did not live in Vanport County into the local community when their sentences or supervised releases were completed. Commissioner Bierke called the language a dealbreaker: “I the 1 area that I thought was very clear that this commission, I believe, unanimous was that we were not gonna let these people be released in the Grand Forks County if they don't live here,” he said during the meeting.

County counsel summarized two outstanding items staff had discussed with DOCR: a process for passing inmate-collected funds for damaged county property to the county, and the release-plan language. DOCR representatives on the meeting said the agency routinely works with release plans and will seek to place people where needed, adding that “people will still be going back to the Grand Forks area, whether it's the Grand Forks County or other places within that area, and they currently do as well. That doesn't change.”

The county attorney told commissioners most previously raised concerns in the draft contract had been addressed but that the release-plan sentence remained. Commissioners said it raised community and political concerns because local residents have repeatedly told the commission they do not want nonlocal inmates released into the county. Several commissioners said they were unwilling to approve the contract while that language remained.

The motion to decline signature passed on a roll-call vote. Commissioners recorded in the roll call included Commissioner Hagen (yes), Commissioner Verdi (yes), Commissioner Beach (yes), Commissioner Ross (yes) and the motioning commissioner (yes). After the vote commissioners directed staff to ask DOCR to remove or clarify the phrase before any final signature.

The county administrator and sheriff were asked to return with an update on staffing, timing and operational implications for the county jail at the commission's next meeting. Commissioners discussed options for filling bed demand if negotiations with the state remain unresolved.

Why it matters: Commission approval would have authorized an intergovernmental arrangement to house state inmates locally. Commissioners said the release-language concern represents a practical limit on that arrangement because it affects where released people can be resettled and how the county would bear downstream impacts.

The county's next step is to relay the board’s objection to DOCR and request revised language; staff asked to return to the commission with an updated contract and any operational timelines if DOCR revises the clause.