Beatrice council member outlines Dempster site costs as county explores jail options

The Gage County Board of Supervisors on March 4 heard a detailed briefing about the Dempster property and how much it might cost to prepare that site for a county jail.

Ted Fairbanks, who identified himself as a member of the city council and chairman of the Dempsters Committee, gave the board a two‑minute overview of the site and the city’s work. He said the city has conducted multiple phase 1 and phase 2 studies and has a Brownfield grant application pending. “We should know about that in June. It’s for $4,000,000,” Fairbanks said, and he described preliminary cost estimates to remove visible buildings and prepare the parcel.

Fairbanks provided the board with early remediation figures and a conservative build estimate. “The estimated cost removed … that just the buildings that you see on the street is about 3,980,000.00, but to level the other buildings you’re probably talking about an additional million and a half to $2,000,000 so you’re talking probably rough numbers $6,000,000 to $7,000,000 to clear the structures from the site,” he said. Fairbanks then explained that additional excavation, filling and bringing low areas above flood‑fringe grade could raise the cost further and that, on a conservative estimate, “you’re gonna have $18,000,000 in the site before you built anything on it.”

Board members stressed that no site has been selected and that the upcoming public informational meetings — scheduled the night of March 4 and again on March 6 — are intended to gather community input about possible locations, site tradeoffs and cost estimates. Board members said the town‑hall style meetings will review current jail conditions, the pros and cons of candidate sites and preliminary cost analyses that staff will use to prepare fiscal estimates.

Fairbanks told the board the city owns the Dempster parcel and has three options if no outside buyer emerges: leave the property as is, take it down incrementally within the city’s biannual budget (the city had already set aside about $200,000 for this year and next), or place a bond before voters to fund more rapid demolition and remediation. He warned that a bond vote could be politically complicated if voters believed the city could have transferred the property to the county.

Fairbanks also described site constraints that complicate building: portions of the property lie in the floodway and floodway fringe, and some below‑grade spaces fill with water during floods, which could require deep excavation and additional fill. He said EPA and other regulators have not yet provided definitive guidance on how deep excavation would need to be, and he cautioned the board that engineering and regulatory work remains to determine feasibility.

The board thanked Fairbanks for the overview and reiterated that county staff and city representatives will continue joint review and public outreach. The informational meetings are intended to inform any future budget, bond proposals or site selection decisions.

Next steps: the board will take public input at the scheduled informational meetings this week, and the city expects a Brownfield grant decision in June that could affect remediation options and costs.