Penobscot County commissioners unanimously move ballot question to let jail be sited outside Bangor

The Penobscot County Commission voted unanimously on June 3 to place a question on the November 2026 general election ballot asking voters whether the county correctional facility may be located outside the county seat.

The chair opened the discussion after a multihour update from consultants and county staff. Jason Sharp, a consultant with the Bureau of Strategic Advisors, told commissioners the project will follow a two‑step process — an authorization and then a bond referendum — and that the county and consultants will refine ballot language, outreach and financial analysis before asking voters to approve any move. "If you have a $200,000 home, it's about $4.17 a month," Sharp said as an illustrative example of projected homeowner impact in one scenario.

Why it matters: The vote formally authorizes the commission to seek public approval to locate the facility outside Bangor, a change that triggers statutory notice and budget‑process steps under state law. Commissioners framed the ballot question as an early, necessary choice that would let the county proceed with planning while limiting upfront spending on design work that might be wasted if the public rejects a move.

Commissioners and staff emphasized that a successful vote would not itself authorize construction but would clear the way for more detailed planning and a later bond referendum. The chair told residents the county will provide detailed fiscal and operational information to reduce surprises at the ballot: "we're asking to trust us with this project and the money necessary to build it," the chair said, noting audits and additional analyses would be posted and shared.

Public commenters urged transparency and thorough technical review before voters decide. Miles Thiemann, a Bangor resident involved in the public review process, pressed for a full accounting of incremental operating costs — staffing, medical and mental‑health services, maintenance, utilities and insurance — and requested mill‑rate examples tailored to different towns so voters know the local fiscal impact. "Any vote on the jail is not only about the jail — it's about the cost of county government," Thiemann said.

Site risk also drew repeated concern. Several speakers warned the preferred parcel is a former quarry or filled pit that may require deep piling and expensive foundation work. Ed Marsh (Hermon) said he toured the current jail and called it unfit, but cautioned that constructing on the quarry could require "H piles" or other expensive piling that would add millions to project cost.

Next steps: Commissioners instructed staff and consultants to refine audit disclosures, ballot language and cost analyses and to notify the budget oversight body as required under Title 30‑A. The motion to place the ballot question was seconded, called, and carried unanimously; commissioners then recessed before executive session to address contract and personnel matters.

What to watch: The county intends to post the FY‑24 audit opinion before July 31 and complete further cost and geotechnical studies before finalizing ballot language or moving to a bond referendum.