Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Jail Construction Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Cochise County board sets $130 million ceiling for new jail project after amendment fails

5535485 · August 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After debate over scope and funding, the Cochise County Jail District board approved a not‑to‑exceed $130 million budget for design, engineering and construction of a new jail on Aug. 5; an amendment to reduce the cap to $120 million failed before the final 3–0 vote.

The Cochise County Jail District Board of Directors voted Aug. 5 to approve a not‑to‑exceed budget of $130,000,000 for design, engineering and construction of a proposed new county jail. The motion passed 3–0 after board discussion about project scope, funding sources and potential cost pressures; an amendment to reduce the ceiling to $120,000,000 failed on a separate roll call.

Supervisor Gomez moved the original motion to set the not‑to‑exceed amount at $130,000,000. Supervisor Crosby, who joined the meeting after an initial recess, proposed and moved an amendment to lower the cap to $120,000,000. Chairman Antinori seconded the amendment to allow a vote, but the amendment did not carry and the board returned to the original $130,000,000 ceiling. The board then approved the main motion unanimously, 3–0.

Board members and county staff described the funding plan discussed in prior work sessions: the $130,000,000 figure reflects a proposed $100,000,000 bond, $20,000,000 in state appropriation (described in the meeting as a legislative appropriation already appropriated by the state) and roughly $10,000,000 in previously collected jail‑tax receipts. “Because to get the $20,000,000 from the… legislature requires $100,000,000 from other sources,” Supervisor Crosby said during debate; he urged a lower ceiling to improve the measure’s voter‑appeal and argued cost containment could help the ballot question pass.

County staff cautioned that the project budget includes not only the hard construction cost—staff estimated roughly $90,000,000 for the building itself—but also utility extensions, potential land acquisition, architectural and owner’s‑representative fees, and other site work. “We proposed the $130,000,000 not to exceed amount based on past work sessions that the board has held regarding the construction budget,” said Miss Golan, a county staff member. She explained the $130,000,000 would be comprised of the $100,000,000 bond, $20,000,000 state appropriation and the approximately $10,000,000 in previously collected jail tax funds, and noted cost‑pressures over a multi‑year project timeline.

Board members also discussed interest costs and amortization, and said the bond strategy had contemplated accelerated payments to reduce overall interest expense. Multiple speakers warned about uncertain material and labor costs over the anticipated multi‑year timeline for design and construction; no additional appropriations or changes to the funding mix were approved at the meeting.

The board did not vote on site selection, construction contracts or a final design at the Aug. 5 jail district meeting; those matters remain subject to future design and procurement steps and to the anticipated bond and tax processes outlined by staff.