1998-10-15 Work Sessionl
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 26
WORK SESSION, OCTOBER 15, 1998PAGE 737
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners held a Work Session on Thursday,
October 5, 1998, at 10:00 a.m. in the New Hanover County Administration Building, Room 501, 320
Chestnut Street, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Members present were: Commissioner Buzz Birzenieks; Commissioner Ted Davis, Jr.;
Commissioner Charles R. Howell; Vice-Chairman Robert G. Greer; Chairman William A. Caster;
County Manager, Allen O’Neal; County Attorney, Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board, Lucie
F. Harrell.
Chairman Caster called the meeting to order, and he stated the purpose of the meeting was
to hear a presentation from CGA Consulting Services, Inc. regarding the need to expand the New
Hanover County Jail. He requested Sheriff Joe McQueen to comment.
Sheriff McQueen advised that in July 1998 the department felt it was time to perform a needs
assessment space study for the New Hanover County Jail because of overcrowding, particularly on
weekends. The firm of CGA Consulting Services, Inc. was hired to perform the needs assessment.
Sheriff McQueen introduced Mr. Bob Green to make a presentation on the findings of the
assessment.
Mr. Green reported the firm of CGA provides pre-planning from the operational aspects of
a jail and recommends design concepts that can be used as a total package when submitting proposals
for an architect. Emphasis is placed on being sure that restrooms, the booking area, and janitorial
areas are located in functional spaces.
The needs assessment is divided into the following phases:
PHASE I:
The planning projection for a jail is based on a period of 20 years. The building
projection is designed for 10 to 20 years because of frequent changes in state law. With these
forecasts, it is imperative that primary spaces, such as the kitchen, the booking area, restrooms etc.,
are designed to support a future expansion. The following topics were presented and discussed:
Jail Capacity:
The New Hanover County Sheriff’s Department operates two facilities, the
Main Jail and the Jail Annex. These facilities have a combined capacity of 299 beds with the
Main Jail providing 209 secure beds, and the Annex Jail providing 90 beds.
The Main Jail is currently housing an average of 304 inmates while the Annex houses 40
inmates. The 40 inmates at the Annex represent approximately 85% of the sentenced inmate
population.
At an average daily population of 343, the system as a whole is operating at 115% above the
design capacity. The section that provides secure custody is 45% above capacity, which
results in an overcrowding factor of 53%.
County Population:
Between 1992 and 1997, the County’s population increased from
122,000 to 148,000 for an average annual gain of 3.2%. By the year 2010, the County
population is projected to be 180,000 and 200,000 by the year 2020.
Much of the County’s growth is due to the large number of retirees moving into the area.
The percentage of the population over the age of 50 is expected to rise by 55% to 65% with
only a 9% gain in the 20-29 age group between 1995 and 2010. These numbers are
significant to the jail forecasting effort because the older age group has a far lower crime rate.
Therefore, it is anticipated that the County’s crime rate will not keep pace with the population
increase. However, the number of reported crime and arrests will probably rise.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 26
WORK SESSION, OCTOBER 15, 1998PAGE 738
Incarceration Rate:
Between 1990 and 1997, the incarceration rate rose from 1.57 (157
inmates per 100,000 population) to 2.29, representing an increase of 46%. During this same
period, the County’s population increased by 23%. The incarceration rate was growing twice
as fast as the County’s general growth rate. Since 1993, the County’s incarceration rate has
slowed significantly and is now advancing at a rate that is comparable to the County’s general
population growth.
Figures for 1997 show New Hanover County’s incarceration rate at 2.29, North Carolina’s
rate at 1.88 and the U. S. Rate at 2.12. The County’s incarceration rate has recorded an
average yearly growth of 2.75%, while the State’s rate has increased at a yearly rate of 10%,
and the national rate at 5%. The slowdown of the County incarceration rate appears to be
partially due to the success of the County’s pretrial diversion program.
Average Length of Stay:
The average length of stay (ALOS) is a factor of the yearly number
of admissions and average daily jail population. In North Carolina, county sentences generally
do not exceed 90 days. The vast majority of persons locally detained in North Carolina are
either on pretrial status or are being held on probation violations, as opposed to being county
sentenced.
Since the ALOS is factored from admissions and daily population numbers, a historical based
trend line can not be developed. Using the 4 months of the admissions data from 1998, as
well as population counts for January through April permits, the County’s ALOS projection
was 12.17 days, a rise of 3% from 1997. As neither the number of admissions or the number
of County sentenced inmates has increased, any rise in the ALOS is attributed to court
processing times.
Case Processing:
The rate of disposition is the ratio of cases disposed to the total number
of cases including those pending at the beginning of the year. Disposition rates give a quick
indication of how efficiently the court system is able to process the flow of cases. Generally
accepted national guidelines suggest that disposition rates should be at 90% or above. The
number of judges, available courtroom space, and the number of prosecutors are key factors
in a jurisdiction’s disposition rate.
Criminal case data from the New Hanover County Superior and District Court were collected.
Figures show that while Superior Court criminal case filings have actually decreased over the
past five years, the court has been unable to keep pace with the workload. As a result there
is a consistent large carryover of cases. For example, in 1997 the Superior Court disposed
of 83% of the new cases that year. There were in excess of 1,300 criminal cases pending
from 1996. As a result, the actual disposition rate for 1997 was 59%. The New Hanover
County District Court appears to be operating at high efficiency. This is due to the ability to
“plea bargain” cases and to offer alternative programs to low level offenders.
The relationship between criminal case disposition rates and jail populations derives from the
fact that as disposition rates decrease, time spent in pretrial detention increases, unless jail
cases are moved to the top of the court docket. A generally accepted criminal case standard
is that 90% of all felony cases should be concluded within 120 days and 90% of misdemeanor
cases should conclude within 60 days.
The movement of jail cases requires active communication and cooperation between
prosecution and defense attorneys, although authority for moving cases rests with the
prosecutor’s office. All too often misdemeanant pretrial inmates in jurisdictions across the
county appear to get lost in the system or conveniently do their time prior to conviction.
After collecting the data as indicated in Table 2 on Page 5 of the report, the figures reflected
that the standard was being met for felony cases, and the standard was not being
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 26
WORK SESSION, OCTOBER 15, 1998PAGE 739
met for misdemeanant cases. Persons are being held longer in jail for misdemeanant charges
in pretrial status than for the actual period of time that a person would be required to serve
if convicted and sentenced by the court.
Assessment of Current Resources:
The Main Jail appears to be structurally sound; however,
it has significant spatial and design deficiencies and is severely overcrowded. Specific space
and design deficiencies were observed in virtually all areas of the facility. With these findings,
the following conclusions were drawn about the Main Jail:
?
Neither significant renovation or on-site capacity expansion of this facility was considered
feasible.
?
With some renovation, the Main Jail could play an important supporting role in the Detention
System’s operation. It should not continue to serve as the County’s primary full service
facility.
Jail Annex:
The Annex appears to have some structural problems, and the facility is not
designed to support effective operations. From these findings, the following conclusion was
drawn:
?
Due to structural problems, the Annex Jail should not be rehabilitated. Continued operation
of this facility should be a part of the County’s detention system planning scheme.
Planning Concepts:
The following concepts were presented:
?
10 to 12 year planned development scheme.
?
Development of a new primary jail.
?
Requirements of downtown court holding capacity.
?
Consideration of construction phase.
Suggested Development Options:
The following options provide possible solutions for
meeting the County’s 635 bed planning need. In reviewing the options, it is important to
recognize that each option can be part of a phased solution which can be done as needed.
Option A:
Development ofa new 425 bed, full service detention facility, which includes
housing for work release and low minimum custody inmates. The current Main Jail operates
at its design capacity of approximately 210 beds. There will be some renovating of the
second floor with other areas of the Main Jail improved as required.
Advantages:
This option offers the least costly construction solution since it requires the
development of fewer new facility beds. It provides a downtown court holding space.
Negatives:
This option continues the operation of a difficult to manage area, the second floor.
Operating efficiency is lost when you operate two facilities.
Option B:
Development of a new 510 bed facility. The Main Jail’s population is reduced
to 125 beds with the abandonment of the second floor as an inmate housing area. The second
floor converts to other use by the County, such as law enforcement administration, health
services, general county office space, special project administration, and record retention.
Other areas of the Mail Jail would be improved as required.
Advantages:
This option improves the operating efficiency of the Main Jail. It also provides
downtown court holding. The second floor can be used for other county functions.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 26
WORK SESSION, OCTOBER 15, 1998PAGE 740
Negatives:
It requires the development of more new beds at a higher price than Option A.
It may be costly to convert the second floor. Operating efficiency is lost when you operate
two facilities.
Option C:
The County abandons the Main Jail as a detention facility and develops a new 635
bed facility.
Positives:
This option centralizes all detention operations and is the most operationally
efficient of the three options. It may also enhance other downtown development schemes.
Negatives:
This is the most expensive option. Acceptance of this scheme requires the
development of downtown court holding space.
PHASE II:
When the needs and feasibility of the jail project have been determined, the governing
body must decide on the amount of construction needed before the design process can begin. This
should involve the following issues:
?
Site Selection Analysis
?
Operational Program Development
?
Preliminary Staffing Guidelines
?
Architectural Space program
?
Preliminary Cost Estimates
?
General Design Concept
In concluding the presentation, Mr. Green requested Mr. Andrew Coffman to comment on
an existing problem in the Main Jail that can be corrected at a nominal cost.
Mr. Coffman reported that during the study, it was found security on the second floor was
not adequate because of a wall that kept officers from effectively monitoring the inmates. He
presented a schematic drawing showing how removal of the center wall would provide the necessary
visibility to effectively monitor the inmates. The cost would be nominal since no utilities or plumbing
equipment would have to be moved. Another option to consider would be to completely gut the
second floor area and reconfigure the space to be used by the Sheriff or for other County
administrative needs.
In closing, Mr. Green advised that regardless of the option selected it would be beneficial for
the County to move forward with removing the central wall on the second floor for security and
safety reasons. He expressed appreciation for being given an opportunity to present the proposal,
and he offered to answer questions.
Discussion followed on the cost of the proposed plan. Mr. Green informed the Board that
until an actual option was selected, it would be difficult to estimate the cost. However, the concept
presented will allow the County to begin the jail expansion with Option A and gradually expand the
jail facilities to Option B and Option C as additional space is needed.
Further discussion was held on how the project would be funded. Sheriff McQueen advised
that federal funding could be available to assist with constructing the facility through the U. S.
Marshal’s office if the County continues to house federal inmates. Once the federal budget is adopted
and the Board selects an option, the U. S. Marshal will be contacted about funding the project.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 26
WORK SESSION, OCTOBER 15, 1998PAGE 741
County Manager O’Neal complimented Sheriff McQueen for the excellent manner in which
the jail facilities have been operated and managed during periods of overcrowding.
After discussion of the many issues facing the County for FY 1999-2000, the Board decided
to include the jail expansion as part of the space needs for New Hanover County. The County
Manager was requested to place this item on the agenda for the retreat to be held on November 21,
1998.
Chairman Caster, on behalf of the Board, expressed appreciation to Mr. Green for the
presentation.
Chairman Caster adjourned the meeting at 11:50 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucie F. Harrell
Clerk to the Board