St. Mary's commissioners reinstate $9.49 million jail upgrades, remove $35.18 million expansion from CIP draft

St. Mary’s County commissioners reviewed capital plans for the adult detention center on March 4, 2013, and agreed to remove a proposed $35.18 million expansion from the draft capital improvement plan while reinstating a $9,489,000 package of upgrades for the existing facility.

The discussion involved the four commissioners present — Commissioner Cynthia L. Jones (1st Commissioner District), Commissioner Daniel L. Morris (2nd Commissioner District), Commissioner Lawrence De Jarbo (3rd Commissioner District) and Commissioner Todd B. Morgan (4th Commissioner District) — along with Acting County Administrator Sue Sabo and county staff. County staff said the debate reflected two paths: a larger renovation-and-expansion project that had previously been bid and came in about $7 million over estimates, and a smaller set of required infrastructure upgrades (HVAC, locks and cameras) that commissioners said are necessary regardless of expansion plans.

Why it matters: Commissioners cited three constraints in weighing the projects — the prior low bid that exceeded the estimate, uncertainty about state participation, and unresolved property-transfer issues tied to the expansion. County staff described the larger project as a rebid of the prior scope, adjusted upward by 5 percent for timing; staff also reported an assumed 50/50 state/county split on eligible costs for the expansion. The county portion of the expansion was presented as roughly $18.36 million of a $35.18 million total. County staff said certain items (for example, EDU charges) are not eligible for state participation.

Key details: County staff presented these figures during the work session: the renovation-and-expansion total was shown at $35,184,576 and staff work estimates placed county funding at approximately $18,363,394 under an assumed 50/50 split of eligible costs. The smaller, county-funded package of repairs and infrastructure for the existing adult detention center was shown at $9,489,000; commissioners said that work — HVAC, locking mechanisms and security cameras — is urgent and should be scheduled earlier. Commissioners and staff also discussed a separate sheriff substation project (listed at about $2.41 million with property acquisition in FY14, design in FY15 and construction in FY16).

State funding and contingencies: Staff and at least one commissioner referenced a letter from the sheriff’s office indicating that the state had $6.2 million “allocated” toward the project; commissioners said that any schedule for rebidding or award should be contingent on (a) clarity about property ownership/transfer and (b) an explicit state funding commitment. County staff asked for confirmation of property-transfer timing, noting that if the county could complete necessary transfers by June it would affect whether the project should be moved into FY14 rather than later years.

Decision and next steps: After extended discussion about the bid-gap, timing, and the county’s willingness to borrow for capital work, commissioners directed staff to remove the $35,184,576 expansion entry from the CIP draft and to reinstate the $9,489,000 adult detention center upgrade in FY14. The board also left the sheriff substation project in the draft with property acquisition in FY14, design in FY15 and construction in FY16. Staff said they would update the CIP spreadsheets, balance sources, and provide revised sheets to the commissioners and to the Planning Commission before the next meeting.

What commissioners emphasized: Several commissioners said they would not support moving forward with the large expansion as previously bid because the low bid had exceeded the original estimate by about $7 million and because the board had earlier declined that solicitation. Commissioners who supported the $9.489 million package argued the upgrades are maintenance-of-effort items the county must fund regardless of expansion status. County staff confirmed the HVAC elements require design work before construction and that some HVAC components could not be completed until 2015 if design occurs in 2014.

Context and caveats: County staff presented the numbers as draft planning estimates, not final contract awards. Staff said the expansion numbers reflected the prior bid plus 5 percent; they also noted that eligibility rules for state participation mean not all line items would receive a 50 percent state match. Commissioners asked staff to prepare revised CIP pages showing the board’s direction for inclusion in the materials to be taken to the Planning Commission and for the board’s next public meeting.

Ending: County staff said they would rework and circulate the CIP schedule that evening and present it at the next meeting. The board recessed to allow staff to update the draft and to return with revised documents for the next public session.