Logan County jail staff outline urgent roof, HVAC and camera repairs after recurring leaks; transfers approved to support jail fund

Jailer Jayler "Josh" Whitney told the Logan County Fiscal Court that persistent roof leaks and failing windows at the county jail are causing repeated interior damage and operational problems, and asked the court to authorize work to produce a bid package and budget numbers for major repairs.

In a presentation to the court, Whitney said the jail’s population and medical needs have placed extra strain on the facility’s systems. "As of this morning, our count was 87 county, 55 state, 26 on our state side," he reported, then described ongoing water intrusion: "We're ruining blanket after blanket...we can't keep absorbent pads." The jailer said crews have tried repeated temporary fixes but that the roof, window eroded block, and HVAC curb issues require engineered specifications and full replacement work.

The court’s discussion focused on the scope and likely cost. Whitney and court members said two independent roof estimates already exist; an early budget number discussed during the meeting was about $340,000 for a new roof but committee members warned the final package could be larger when HVAC curb work and replacement of up to eight rooftop units are included. Magistrates and staff repeatedly emphasized the need for a formal bid package and suggested hiring a professional to prepare specifications to ensure comparable, competitively bid proposals.

Why it matters: Court members said the leaks are damaging electrical fixtures, cabinets and interior finishes and creating recurring maintenance costs. Several speakers urged a specification that covers not just roofing material but the HVAC curbs and flashing around units — deficiencies the jail's maintenance vendors told the court would continue leaking unless corrected during roof replacement.

Details and next steps - Whitney described multiple problem areas: leaking around attic/window openings, standing water inside walls near the kitchen and walk‑in cooler, rusted cabinets in a library area and failed flashing/curbs beneath HVAC units. He said earlier moisture scans had identified problem sections and that two roofing contractors provided similar diagnoses. - Multiple magistrates recommended the building committee work with jail staff to present a consolidated bid package. The court suggested seeking an engineer to produce specs so bids are comparable and to avoid later disputes over suitability of materials. - Cost context: Speakers said past budget estimates for roofing work on other county buildings ran in the low hundreds of thousands; the group repeatedly cautioned that replacing eight rooftop HVAC units and performing tuckpointing and curb repairs could push the total higher than an initial roof‑only figure. - Procurement and timing: Several magistrates urged following the Department for Local Government (DLG) procurement rules and recommended the court consider hiring a professional to produce bid documents to avoid rework and vendor disputes. Whitney agreed to meet with the building committee and to provide a presentation of photos and estimates.

Related fiscal action During the meeting the court approved a transfer of $175,000 from the occupational net profits tax fund to the jail fund. The motion passed on roll call with support from the magistrates present and will increase available cash for the jail's operations and repairs. The transfer passed by roll call (majority yes; recorded by roll call during the meeting).

Other jail operational matters - Commissary and inmate‑account reconciliation: The audit report and jailer's reply prompted extended discussion. Whitney acknowledged gaps in historical documentation for commissary receipts and said the jail has created new daily checkout logs and will reconcile monthly bank statements and vendor reports. He said vendor access limitations (requiring vendor help tickets rather than direct access) have complicated internal review. - Medical and safety: Whitney described one recent medical emergency in a pod that lacked direct camera coverage; because the prior camera vendor was no longer supporting the system, he authorized installation of cameras to eliminate blind spots. He said the decision was taken because prior vendor support was unavailable; the court accepted his explanation but emphasized procurement rules going forward.

What the court asked staff to do - Jail staff were asked to provide a budgetary estimate (not a firm contract price) for roofing and related work for consideration in the next fiscal process and to coordinate with the building committee on a bid package. Staff agreed to provide photographs, vendor estimates, and a recommended procurement path.

Ending Court members and the jailer agreed to work on a bid package and to present more detailed cost estimates at a future meeting. The transfer of $175,000 to the jail fund was approved to help cover near‑term needs; further capital decisions will follow after the building committee and staff present an engineered scope and formal bids.