Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget And Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Financial advisory board backs $225 million capital cap; members warn behavioral-health spending and interlocal terms could be strained
Summary
The Financial and Facilities Advisory Board recommended a $225 million capital budget cap to the county council and asked the design team to return options for that scenario. Members and J-POP participants raised concerns that a conservative fiscal scenario could delay or reduce behavioral-health and non-carceral investments and prompt renegotiation of interlocal agreements with cities.
The county's Financial and Facilities Advisory Board recommended a $225 million capital budget cap for the jail-and-Behavioral Care Center project during discussions reported to the Justice Project Oversight and Planning Committee on April 16.
"We passed a motion to adopt or recommend to the county council a $225 million capital budget," Peter said, summarizing FAB's action and adding that FAB asked STV and the design-build team to return with what can be done under that budget scenario.
Board members and J-POP participants warned that a conservative fiscal scenario could reduce the share and timing of non-carceral investments. One conservative model discussed in the meeting showed non-carceral (behavioral-health and programmatic) spending falling to roughly 44% in early years and not reaching a 50% parity until decades later, participants said. Committee members stressed the need to keep the Behavioral Care Center adequately funded and to clarify how interlocal agreements with cities would be renegotiated if the county seeks additional time or money from municipal partners.
"We wanted STV and the design build team to come back with what they could do for $225 million build and then for us to review," Peter said, describing FAB's direction. Heather and other advisory members described the meeting as challenging because of difficult trade-offs between construction cost risks and programmatic commitments.
Participants noted that the capital scenario under discussion covers bricks-and-mortar costs; non-capital program funding and staffing would be budgeted separately and could be reimbursable in part through Medicaid if the Behavioral Care Center qualifies for clinical services. The meeting record also acknowledged $14 million in state funding already identified to support the BCC.
Council and committee members asked staff for additional financial models showing how increased investment in diversion and behavioral-health programs could reduce long-term jail demand and potentially lower the needed number of beds. Multiple speakers urged that the county model alternative investments against projected jail demand and emphasized that any interlocal renegotiation with cities should explicitly define booking restrictions and programmatic expectations.
The FAB recommendation will be forwarded to county council for further review; the design team will prepare options consistent with the $225 million scenario for stakeholder review.
