Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Union County board selects jail option three — new facility with reuse of sheriff administration building

Union County Board of Commissioners · April 20, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After testimony about failing systems in the existing 33‑year‑old jail and review of four construction options, the board voted to pursue option three (new jail with reuse of the sheriff administration space); county staff and the sheriff emphasized high ongoing maintenance and operational costs for the existing facility.

Union County commissioners voted to advance a plan commonly described at the meeting as "option three" for a new jail after hearing detailed staff modeling and testimony from Sheriff Eddie Kathy about persistent system failures at the current facility.

County finance staff presented debt models showing the capital cost and tax impacts for a range of options (from partial reuse to full replacement). Sheriff Kathy described frequent, costly maintenance and systems failures in the existing 33‑year‑old jail, including water intrusion, failing HVAC and sewer problems: “We’re spending $450,000 with Blackwater to come in to reprogram things … We’re putting eight new heating and air conditioning on that jail as we speak this week,” he said, adding that the facility was “at its limit.”

Option three — described during staff presentations as a 500‑bed facility with a 600‑bed core and reusing the sheriff’s administrative building but demolishing the old jail—was framed by staff and the sheriff as a balance between capital cost and avoiding the operational complexity of running two fully staffed jails. Commissioners asked detailed questions about demolition costs, the advisability of keeping or demolishing the administration building, and long‑term operating costs. Staff estimated roughly $2.25M for repairs to the existing admin building if it were kept serviceable; demolition was estimated separately.

A motion to pursue option three passed on a voice vote. County staff will incorporate the selected option into bond‑referendum planning and follow up with detailed cost and schedule material for future board consideration. Officials emphasized that the vote covered the capital option to move forward; operational staffing and annual running costs will be addressed as part of budgeting and implementation planning.