Cochise County residents press supervisors for forensic audit, clear ballot language on jail bond

BISBEE, Ariz. — At a June 17 meeting of the Cochise County Board of Supervisors acting as the Cochise County Jail District Board of Directors, residents urged the board to require detailed ballot language for any future jail bond and to commission a forensic audit of prior jail-district spending before asking voters to approve new taxes.

Public commenters raised a series of questions about how any bond would be paid, how existing funds would be applied, and whether bond proceeds could be used for jail operations. Randall Limbach, a Sierra Vista resident, told the board, "The taxpayers demand real and timely accountability," and asked for "a comprehensive forensic audit of the sheriff's office to be conducted by an independent auditor with absolutely no connections to Cochise County and or any of its employees or elected officials." Limbach also asked whether a bond would be reduced by money already on hand and whether voting yes on a bond would require a tax increase.

The comments reflected broader public requests for specifics before a ballot measure. Yvonne Mayer of Hereford asked for a target size, capacity and location for a new jail and said voters should be given cost estimates and financing methods before voting: "Under no circumstances just don't ask us to sign a blank check," she said. Another resident said she believed $20,000,000 had been set aside by the state and that Senator Kyrsten Sinema had secured $2,000,000, and asked how the county's contingency funds would be applied to a new facility.

Speakers also pressed the board for transparency about funds collected under the previously invalidated jail-district tax and about the settlement the county reached over earlier litigation. A commenter asked that the county publish what the settlement requires of the board; County Administrator Gilman confirmed she would provide written information and said she would post it on the county website and send it to local media. Gilman responded, "Yes, ma'am. I can do that." Supervisor Crosby said he would re-circulate the settlement documentation and noted that what the board can do will depend on applicable statutes and the settlement terms.

Members of the public suggested multiple funding options, including bonds, grants and federal reimbursement if the federal government housed detainees. Randall Limbach proposed asking the federal government to construct and operate an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility at the Douglas Port of Entry to reduce local costs.

The board did not take substantive action on a new bond or on an audit request during the public-comment portion. Procedurally, the board approved consent agenda items 1 and 2; Supervisor Gomez moved to approve the consent items and Supervisor Crosby seconded the motion. The board recorded aye votes and the motion passed.

On the issue of collecting the jail-district tax, Supervisor Crosby said collection would end at the end of the month. County Administrator Gilman said she would prepare and distribute written clarifications about available funds, prior spending and the settlement obligations "so people understand what we're required to do having accepted that settlement." The board indicated it will rely on the statutes and the settlement terms to determine next steps on the jail-district planning and any future ballot language.

No timeline was set at the meeting for a new bond election or for a forensic audit; speakers repeatedly asked that any future ballot include the estimated size of the jail, number of beds, location, total cost and the proposed method of financing.

The meeting opened with a public notice stating the meeting was held "Pursuant to ARS 38 4 31.02 H," and the chair closed the jail district portion after the consent vote.