As one of the newer members of the Hancock County Council, I would like to respond to the article by Commissioner Marc Huber (“The truth about the jail project,” Sept. 11, A4).
This is a very controversial subject but one that needs to be addressed. Everyone is entitled to as much information as is available. I can sympathize with the confusion as so many figures have been thrown out there, and they seem to be changing daily. What are you to believe? Let me state now that my opinions and observations are solely mine and no one else’s. Hopefully, I can clarify some of the myths surrounding this project.
Hancock County has got to do something to curtail the ever-growing opioid crisis and the overcrowding at the jail. The safety of all the staff and prisoners, and treatment for the mentally ill and those with drug addiction must be addressed.
This County Council has NOT been kicking the can down the road but has been using due diligence to try to find solutions best for everyone. This takes time. Asking the hard questions is part of the process to reaching conclusions agreeable to the majority. We supported the county commissioners’ request, and as Huber pointed out, funded both the architectural design and the schematic design for the proposed downtown project totaling close to $1 million.
A referendum was offered which failed. Why? I believe it wasn’t worded correctly and not explained thoroughly. The project was NEVER intended to be paid for solely by property taxes. The income tax had been approved by the legislature giving us the 50/50 split the council always wanted. ALL Hancock County taxpayers would have shared the cost.
I, personally, had conversations with some of the property owners involved with the threat of eminent domain and they were NOT in favor of this action.
I question the figures quoted by Huber — $500,000 to $1 million annually — for the cost of relocation to the county farm. How were these figures derived? I also take exception to the idea that moving out to the county farm would cause county buildings to be abandoned. Moving out to the county farm allows for expansion in the future if needed.
At the Sept. 12 council meeting, the council took steps to temporarily help alleviate the over-growing issue by proposing a resolution to support an $8.5 million bond to house 146 inmates in mobile housing at the county farm. The 16 staffers needed for this was also discussed and approved. When a permanent facility is built (at the county farm), these temporary units can be sold or used for local needs (homeless shelters, treatment facilities, etc.).
This is only a resolution. The public will have their voices heard. Building plans and information are available to anyone interested. If it does come to a referendum again, I hope you can vote with the knowledge you have gathered, and if you don’t understand exactly what it means — ask someone.
This county council may differ at times, but I do not feel we are at odds with each other. I respect their views, listen with an open mind and always have you, the taxpayer in mind on decisions being made. As we progress through this together, questions are always welcomed.
Martha Vail is a member of the Hancock County Council. Send comments to [email protected].
