Sullivan County hears update on new jail: contractors cite smoke‑evac issues, contingency spending and phased warranties

Contractors and county leaders spent the bulk of the Sullivan County Commission's Feb. 19 meeting updating commissioners on the county's new jail project, outlining the current contract value, recent technical failures and how phased occupancy will affect warranties and the timeline.

Marcus Wilcox, identified on the record as the project manager, said the current contract amount is $104,787,000 and that the team has worked through a series of change orders. "Currently, the the current contract amounts a $104,787,000," Wilcox said during the presentation. He and other contractors described unforeseen conditions that produced schedule and scope changes.

Contractor Louis Cortino of MDI Companies described difficulty getting the smoke‑exhaust system to meet tests. "The way [smoke] behavior of the smoke, traveling through the ducts is more of an art," Cortino said, adding that the original design's detectors did not pass and the team added equipment and adjustments to address the failures.

Commissioners repeatedly pressed who will pay for added work when tests or designs fail. Commissioner Glover raised a specific cost concern, asking whether a $305,000 expense would fall to county taxpayers if it was a design flaw; contractors said some charges came from added scope and others from unforeseen site conditions. The board's financial questions included contingency spending: commissioners were told contingency funds of about $2,000,000 existed and that micropile foundation work accounted for roughly $634,000 of recent spending after deeper bedrock required longer piles.

The discussion also covered elevators and design scope. Contractors said the original plans included elevators but that the expansion and finished‑out alternate areas changed elevator service needs; commissioners worried about day‑to‑day operations, such as moving medical equipment and trays between floors.

Warranty and phased occupancy were recurring concerns. County members asked whether training, limited staff occupancy and use of kitchen or laundry equipment for training would start product warranties. A contractor representative said warranties and turnover will be phased for different systems and that some warranties (for example, elevators) will only begin when associated control cabinets and related work are completed and turned over.

Commissioners also asked who will decide when it is safe to move inmates into the new building. Several commissioners voiced support for letting operational leaders at the jail make the call. "So would you be in agreement that we let Chief Carswell get on that decision since he's been with us... let Chief Carswell and sheriff make that final decision on when we move in?" a commissioner asked; the proposal received general assent during the meeting record.

Contractors committed to returning with a status update. Wilcox said the current contract completion date is April 20, 2026, and agreed to provide an update at the commission's April meeting. Several commissioners asked for a compiled list of items already under warranty, outstanding defects (including visible rust and busted pipes) and an itemized estimate of any additional taxpayer costs before the board would consider placing inmates in the facility.

Why this matters: the project is one of the county's largest capital undertakings; delays, change orders and warranty disputes have budgetary and operational consequences for taxpayers, jail staff and court operations. The commission recorded multiple technical details (contract value, contingency spending and specific change‑order drivers) and directed staff and contractors to provide follow‑up materials and an April briefing.