The Chelsea Standard
A Heritage Newspaper
Weekly Publication
Top 5 stories of 2005 - No. 3: Voters reject jail millage, county threatens subsidies
By Michelle Rogers, Editor
PUBLISHED: January 5, 2006
The year 2005 started out with county leaders asking taxpayers to dig deeper into their pockets to fund expansion of the Washtenaw County Jail, construction of a new 14A District courthouse, more reintegration services and increased mental-health services at a cost of $314 million.
Advertisement
But voters rejected the measure and a battled ensued over the County Board's decision to fund the project regardless with sheriff's subsidies offered to local municipalities for years.
Voters were asked to approve a 0.75-mill, 20-year tax Feb. 22 that would have cost the owner of a home valued at $200,000, and assessed at half, $75 per year.
Critics of the measure argued that the new tax would be spent unwisely on more beds as jail officials planned to add about 200 in the next 10 years. Calling themselves the No Giant Jail Committee, a group of opponents, spearheaded by Scio Township Trustee Chuck Ream, said many inmates don't belong in jail and that incarceration is not the answer to substance abuse.
By the end of March, the County Board of Commissioners was already discussing cuts to sheriff road patrols, with about 90 sheriff's deputies' jobs on the chopping block.
Chelsea-area officials began looking at a multi-jurisdictional police department to solve the problems as the county proposed eliminating a $90,000 subsidy for every police service unit, or deputy, a municipality contracted for, essentially doubling the cost of each law enforcement contract.
While Sylvan, Lima and Lyndon townships rely on the Michigan State Police and don't contract with the Sheriff's Office, leaders of those municipalities said they were concerned because the state police could cut back as well. They also cited slow response time from the state police. As a result, they pushed the Chelsea Police Department to consider branching out.
A forum held May 4 in Chelsea resulted in angry criticisms of the county, with accusations that the county's valuations of police service units were inflated.
Washtenaw County Sheriff's Deputy Harry Valentine suggested the County Board consider exploring whether to tap into its capital improvements fund to pay for jail expansion and suggested that residents only pay for police services they used.
Chelsea Police Chief Scott Sumner emphasized that the Sheriff's Office provides crucial mutual aid and training to city police, and that Chelsea is not looking to take over the county's role.
Washtenaw County Sheriff Dan Minzey proposed a plan to double the number of beds at the jail for half the price tag the county administration proposed in February, but said the county administrator can figure out funding. He said the county could look at putting together another ballot proposal or finding funds in capital reserves.
Minzey's proposal called for modular-designed, prefabricated cells, with at least 225 beds, by late 2006 at a cost of $10.7 million. The jail currently has a 332-bed capacity, and overcrowding is causing the county to board inmates at other facilities and release some inmates early. Minzey said based on the county's population, national jail standards recommend 752 beds.
In July, County Administrator Bob Guenzel added a new courthouse in Saline to the mix as part of a 96-bed jail expansion, new courthouse and increased rehabilitation services at a cost of $30 million, and called three community meetings to gather input.
By September, a grassroots committee calling itself the Citizens to Save Our Sheriff's Department had organized and was looking to bring the county's plan to eliminate subsidies to a public vote. This was in response to the Washtenaw County Board's decision Sept. 7 to eliminate sheriff's subsidies by 2008 to free up money for construction of a new county jail and courthouse. The board approved a proposal to sell $29.9 million in bonds to fund the project.
On Sept. 26, the citizens' group turned in nearly 23,000 petition signatures, surpassing its goal of 20,000, in hopes of forcing a public referendum. But in October, it was announced that the petition drive, if 15,000 signatures were verified, may not force a public vote because the County Board would have to agree to it.
County Clerk Larry Kestenbaum said the petition drive could result, however, in the board deciding not to move forward with a bond issue and instead looking for other ways to fund the projects.
On Nov. 22, it was official. Kestenbaum verified that the grassroots group had surpassed the 15,000 signatures necessary with 17,223.
Two weeks later, the County Board voted to accept, certify and file the signatures, but did not make a decision as to what to do with them. They said they would revisit the issue Jan. 4.
The board also voted to support four-year contracts from municipalities despite a push from area leaders for two-year pacts with increases in the PSU rate expected by 2008.
Not all stories are guaranteed to appear
online. The Web edition contains a reasonable
sampling of the print edition stories.
For the most complete news coverage, we invite you to
subscribe
to the print edition of the paper.
Expanded
Web
Coverage
TOP JOBS
