Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Jail topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mixed public reaction at Cochise County meeting over jail district settlement and funding
Summary
Public commenters at the March 25 Board of Supervisors meeting expressed support for a lawsuit settlement related to the jail district, urged dissolution of the jail district, and voiced concerns about potential taxpayer costs for a proposed new jail.
Several Cochise County residents used the March 25 public‑comment period to speak about the county’s jail district, a recent settlement and plans for a new jail.
Sandy Troll of Sierra Vista told the board she supported the jail-district lawsuit settlement and praised supervisors for what she called “dedication and commitment to the citizens of Cochise County.” “Settling the lawsuit is the right thing to do, and I'm so happy with this action,” she said.
Others urged more drastic action. Randall Limbach told the board the jail district “must be dissolved,” and characterized the district’s creation and ballot language as constitutionally suspect. Limbach said the sheriff had already received “about $20,000,000 from the state, $8,000,000 from Cochise County citizens” and criticized a reported $90,000,000 request for a new jail, arguing a $50,000,000 bond would be adequate.
Several commenters said they were concerned about taxpayer costs and wanted more public forums and transparency about site selection, utilities and transportation costs for any new facility. Tamara Burch asked for town halls and said voters should be able to understand how and why tax dollars are used. Other speakers — including Bruce Harris and Radford Hyde — said they accept the need for a new jail but objected to the proposed funding mechanism and urged a different approach.
Some speakers also raised separate concerns about elections and county procedures in their remarks, and others urged the board to be responsive to constituents’ questions about both jail conditions and proposed spending.
No formal board action on the jail district or related litigation was taken at the meeting during the public-comment period; public comments were recorded for the board’s consideration.
