Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jail And Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners add 'Option 2' for adult detention center; direct staff to pursue state funding
Summary
At a budget work session of the St. Mary's County Commissioners, staff presented a revised plan for the adult detention center and commissioners gave direction to add the plan labeled “Option 2” to the county’s capital improvement program.
Get email alerts on the Jail And Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a budget work session of the St. Mary's County Commissioners, staff presented a revised plan for the adult detention center and commissioners gave direction to add the plan labeled “Option 2” to the county’s capital improvement program.
County finance and public‑works staff said Option 2 restructures the project to build two modular “pods” as swing space (one a housing wing, one a medical/infirmary wing) and to phase renovation of the existing facility. Staff told commissioners the change would reduce the immediate need to house inmates offsite during renovation and would improve the county’s eligibility for up to a 50% state funding match on grant‑eligible portions of the project, provided the project and design meet state criteria and funding benchmarks.
Staff described tradeoffs: the renovation‑only approach would require relocating inmates offsite and carrying an estimated relocation cost in the range discussed during the meeting (county staff referenced $6 million to $8 million), while the Option 2 approach shows an increase in county capital outlay compared with the prior CIP baseline but lowers offsite housing costs and targets the state match. Staff said the county should move on the project planning before July 1 to meet state timing/benchmark requirements for the 50% program.
Officials identified several line‑item impacts associated with Option 2: a roughly $3.0 million line for a new pod, engineering and security upgrades tied to the renovated facility, and estimated recurring operating impacts once new space is online. Staff presented estimated incremental operating costs in the early years of the project, including an estimated FY2020 operating impact of about $1.7 million and an additional FY2021 operating amount of roughly $346,000 (utilities, janitorial, and additional posts), and noted four new full‑time posts were carried over from prior project plans and would be part of the recurring cost base. Staff said some elements—HVAC for inmate housing units—are not eligible for the 50% match and therefore remain 100% local costs.
Sheriff’s office and public works leaders participated in the discussion and provided project letters supporting Option 2. Commissioners asked about schedule and the length of a renovation; staff and public works estimated a traditional renovation would take longer than a year (estimates given during the meeting ranged from 12–24 months, with 18 months mentioned), increasing the period the county would need to house inmates elsewhere. Option 2 was presented as a way to provide local swing space close to Leonardtown and the courthouse and thereby reduce inmate transport and related costs.
After discussion commissioners provided direction to add Option 2 to the CIP and to proceed with the planning steps necessary to pursue state funding and meet the state grant timetable. Staff said it would return with updated budget and schedule detail in the next work session.
Why this matters: the approach chosen affects several million dollars in capital and multi‑year operating costs, the county’s ability to claim state matching funds, and where inmates are housed while renovation occurs.
Ending: Staff will return with refined cost estimates, a schedule to meet the state grant timing requirements, and related operating cost projections for inclusion in subsequent budget sessions.

