Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves application for $70M jail renovation grant; supervisors press for alternatives to reopening County Jail No. 3
Summary
The Board of Supervisors authorized the Sheriff—s Department to apply for up to $70 million in state SB 844 funds to renovate County Jail No. 2, while demanding more detailed relocation and financing plans that avoid reopening older jail facilities by default.
The Board of Supervisors voted to authorize the Sheriff—s Department to apply for up to $70 million in competitive state funding under SB 844 to renovate County Jail No. 2, while board members pressed for clarity about how inmates would be housed during renovations and whether County Jail No. 3 could be reopened as part of a temporary relocation plan.
Why it matters: The application seeks large state investment to renovate aging jail infrastructure. Supervisors acknowledged the capital need but used the hearing to press for planning that avoids reopening older jails and to seek alternatives that reduce jail population and prioritize community-based solutions.
Item details: The sheriff asked board approval to submit a funding application that lists a potential project budget of $70,000,000 and to identify matching funds and additional city contributions. The sheriff—s summary to the board described a matching cash contribution and additional funds; the board resolution authorizes pursuit of the competitive award and acceptance/expenditure if awarded.
Supervisor questions and sheriff—s responses: Supervisor Hilary Ronan asked specifically about contingency plans for relocating inmates while County Jail No. 2 is renovated. Sheriff Vicki Hennessy said the most feasible options are: 1) phased renovation with complex logistics (costly and disruptive to remaining inmates); 2) moving inmates to County Jail No. 3 while work proceeds; or 3) housing inmates in another county jail with capacity. "We did look at renovating that jail and moving people around as we renovated each section," Hennessy said, but she noted that phasing can be cost-prohibitive and disruptive. She added the department would continue to investigate alternatives and that the grant-application process (decisions expected in June) provides time to plan.
Board concerns: Several supervisors, including Ronan and Supervisor Sandra Fewer, emphasized that reopening County Jail No. 3 should not be treated as the default relocation strategy. Supervisor Aaron Peskin expressed fiscal caution about how the city might finance required matching funds if the grant is awarded; Supervisor Kim asked the board to scrutinize any plan to use Certificates of Participation for matching funds and urged exploring cash or other financing approaches.
Vote and next steps: The board approved the resolution to apply for the SB 844 funding and authorized the sheriff to submit the application. The vote was unanimous. If the state awards funds, a formal accept-and-expend ordinance will return to the board for final approval and to set any matching-fund authorizations.
Implementation and timeline: The sheriff said the state decision on awards is expected in June; the department will use the intervening months to refine plans for renovation phasing and inmate housing alternatives. Supervisors asked to be briefed individually about relocation options and financing before any accept-and-expend decision comes back to the board.
Vote: Resolution to authorize grant application (Item 27) adopted unanimously; roll-call recorded 11 ayes.
