1) January 17, 2012 – 7:30 pm @ Knox Middle School Cafeteria 2) January 18, 2012 – 6:00 pm @...

18
1) January 17, 2012 – 7:30 pm @ Knox Middle School Cafeteria 2) January 18, 2012 – 6:00 pm @ North Judson High School 3) January 19, 2012 – 6:00 pm @ Oregon Davis Jr./Sr. High School Cafeteria STARKE COUNTY JAIL COMMUNITY INFORMATION MEETINGS

Transcript of 1) January 17, 2012 – 7:30 pm @ Knox Middle School Cafeteria 2) January 18, 2012 – 6:00 pm @...

1) January 17, 2012 – 7:30 pm @ Knox Middle School Cafeteria

2) January 18, 2012 – 6:00 pm @ North Judson High School

3) January 19, 2012 – 6:00 pm @ Oregon Davis Jr./Sr. High School Cafeteria

STARKE COUNTY JAIL COMMUNITY INFORMATION MEETINGS

Welcome/Introductions Purpose of the Meeting

Provide community w/ latest update on the Starke County Jail.

Inform Community of CEDIT legislation being authored by State Representative Gutwein

Introductions Jail Committee Members

Kathy Norem - Commissioner Kim Hall - Judge Dave Pearman – Councilman Marty Lucas – Attorney Ted Hayes – WKVI Ron Henningsmith – CASA Director Carol Johnson Katherine Chaffins – Auditor Oscar Cowen –Sheriff Bill Dulin – Chief Deputy Greg Hewitt – Jail Commander

Financial Consultant: Todd Samuelson - Umbaugh, Associates

Starke County Jail History Constructed in 1976 No major renovations or improvements 2nd oldest jail in the State of Indiana Built to house 46 inmates Currently a 62 bed facility Shifting inmate demographics

Current Problems and Issues

Long standing building issues per jail inspection reports

ADA (American Disabilities Act) Mechanical/Electrical Operational difficulties posing risk to Staff Long standing overcrowding per jail

inspection reports Public Safety Sentencing Reform (?) Class Action Lawsuit

(Attorney Martin Lucas)

SOLUTIONS Starke County Jail Committee Formed Conduct Needs Assessment Explore all Building and Financial

Options What provides the best option for

Public Safety/Community/Tax Payers

OPTION A

Do Nothing Could be forced by Federal Courts to

act (on their recommendations) Cost high (due to potential litigation) Public Safety negatively impacted Equity impact is obviously lower Functionality is obviously not improved Future expansion

OPTION BDevelop Existing Site

Remodeling may or may not satisfy requirements

Cost is potentially higher to remodel/add on

Public Safety could possibly be improved Equity impact is slightly improved, but in

essence this is a Band-Aid Functionality is only slightly impacted

because of site (linear v. pod designs) Future expansion

OPTION C

New Construction on Current County Property New construction would satisfy

requirements Cost is not typically as high as remodeling Public Safety would be substantially

impacted Equity impact is substantially higher (state-

of-the-art facility) Functionality optimum Future expansion

OPTION DNew Construction on a New Site

New construction would satisfy requirements

Cost slightly higher due to site acquisition

Public Safety would be substantially impacted

Equity impact is substantially higher (state-of-the-art facility)

Functionality optimum Future expansion

OPTION E

Lease a New Facility from a Private Entity

Leasing would satisfy requirements (because the board would demand this)

Cost is unknown, and likely hard to control Public Safety would be substantially impacted Equity impact is non-existent Functionality is unknown because we would

be at the mercy of the leasor Future expansion

OPTIONS – Final Note:

ALL OPTIONS BESIDES “DOING NOTHING” WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR OPERATIONAL COSTS AND SUSTENANCE.

Financial Options The ultimate solution determined by Starke

County to address the County Jail will most likely involve a significant capital outlay

Over the last couple years, the County has gone through a extensive process to identify/prioritize capital needs throughout the County and available resources to address them

It is clear that the County currently does not have current resources to fund a significant capital outlay to address the County Jail and, as most counties do, would need to issue bonds to secure funding

Bonds for a County Jail project are typically secured by property taxes, income taxes, or some combination thereof

Financial Options Although the County has not yet

determined the ultimate solution for the County Jail, for preliminary basis of evaluating options, we utilized information available to estimate options/impact of a new facility and a bond issue of approximately $13.6 million

Summary of OptionsProperty Tax Income Tax Supported

Supportedwith Property Tax Back

Up

Estimated Bond Issue $13,580,000 $13,605,000

Assumed Interest Rate 5.50% 5.60%

Assumed Maturity 20 Years 20 YearsAssumed Annual Payment 1,210,000 1,220,000

Assumed Tax Rate $0.12 Per 0.65% $100 of Net

Assessed of Adjusted GrossValue Income

The above information is based on an assumed maximum project cost for a replacement jail facility

14

15

ILLUSTRATIVE ANNUAL IMPACT ON PROPERTY TAX BILLS

Residential (1) $50,000 home $11.99

$96,500 home (2) $36.54

$150,000 home $78.23

$200,000 home $117.20

Commercial / Industrial (3) $100,000 assessment $119.90

$500,000 assessment $599.50

$1,000,000 assessment $1,199.00

Agricultural Land One acre (4) $1.80

(1) Includes standard deduction at the lesser of $45,000 or 60% of home value, the 35% supplemental homestead deduction and the $3,000 mortgage deduction.(2) Median home value for Starke County per the US Census Bureau 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.(3) Assumes no exemptions or deductions.(4) Agricultural land is assessed at $1,500 per acre for 2011 payable 2012 per the Department of Local Government Finance.

16

ILLUSTRATIVE ANNUAL IMPACT ON INCOME TAX BILLS

Assumed Maximum Income Tax Rate 0.65%

State taxable income$20,000 $130

$40,000 $260

$60,000 $390

$80,000 $520

$100,000 $650

Financial OptionsOther Considerations:Property Tax Supported Bonds

Circuit breaker (tax caps) impact Would cause further revenue loss to other County

funds as well as to the cities, towns, schools, libraries in the county

Would not address additional funds that may be necessary for additional operating costs

Less progressive- based on property ownedIncome Tax Supported Bonds

Requires legislation at State level to create option for County Council to implement

Need higher revenue stream than assumed debt service due to potential for fluctuation (coverage)

May use coverage for operating expenses More progressive – based on income earned

QUESTIONS

For additional information and to follow the Jail Committee’s progress, please access our website at the following link:

http://co.starke.in.us/jail-info