Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jail Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grand Traverse County commissioners hear engineering update and set plan for advisory and technical committees on jail needs
Summary
County commissioners received an engineering briefing showing short-term structural monitoring and soil testing at the county jail, were told the insurer will review any claim, and directed staff to seek facilitators and convene an advisory committee and a technical committee to produce a holistic needs assessment, with RFPs targeted for Sept. 17.
Patton Shinn of Machine (Machin) Engineering told Grand Traverse County commissioners on Sept. 10 that soil borings near the county jail produced “good results,” and that engineers have installed 14 crack gauges and live sensors to monitor building movement during an active eight-week monitoring period. “We have good results,” Shinn said, and engineers will complete laboratory testing and produce a soils report after the monitoring cycle.
The board discussed how to turn engineering data into planning decisions. Mr. Arelton, who introduced the executive committee’s memo, told commissioners the county notified its insurer, Michigan Municipal Risk (MMRMA), about the June movement and that MMRMA will await the engineering report before determining coverage; he said it is “unlikely” repairs would be covered. The executive committee presented four recommendations: form a Justice Facility Advisory Committee (JFAC) for public engagement, create a Justice Facility Technical Committee for specifications and data-gathering, hire a facilitator to coordinate public input, and study co-location or county services facility options.
Commissioners debated sequencing and scope. Commissioner Henschel urged a program-first approach, warning against “building a building instead of a program” and stressing that jail design should reflect programs, medical needs and long-term financing. Several commissioners and staff said the advisory group should gather community and program input while a technical committee compiles operational data (average daily population, cell types, medical and negative-pressure cells) so a facilitator can synthesize those threads into a needs assessment.
Tom Kermani, a senior risk consultant with Michigan Municipal Risk, told the board a needs assessment should be thorough and noted that facility needs have shifted over time; based on his experience he said a county may require much larger capacity than expected and stated a view that a growing jurisdiction could need “at least a 300 bed facility,” a planning input rather than a board decision. Commissioners pushed back that program choices affect bed counts and that the committees’ output should inform any sizing or bonding decisions.
On a next step, the executive committee proposed issuing RFPs for facilitator services and related professional work, with staff aiming to present those RFPs for board action Sept. 17; if awarded on the proposed schedule, committee work could effectively begin in January. Commissioners asked for the full RFP scope before it is released and for facilitator bids to demonstrate relevant jail and public-engagement experience.
No formal votes were taken on the recommendations at this meeting. The board opened and closed two public-comment periods with no public speakers and adjourned after the discussion.
