Special Reports

Editors Note: This is the third of a three-part series dealing with the conditions of the Smith County Jail facilities for those who work in the jail and those being held. Tyler paper reporters and photographers spent hours on several different occasions in the jail to see the problems first-hand.

By ROY MAYNARD and KENNETH DEAN
Staff Writers

Joel Baker slipped into the Smith County Commissioners Court meeting on March 13, 2006, and listened to the discussions about the jail bond election planned two months later. Baker had been elected to the county judge post less than a week earlier (to take office the following January).

He knew the action taken on this day would inevitably affect his own tenure on the court. The jail was a headache he had no wish to inherit, he says.

He watched as commissioners came to an impasse on the location of a new facility. Commissioner JoAnn Hampton was committed to the downtown site, while then-County Judge Becky Dempsey and commissioners David Stein and JoAnn Fleming favored the less-expensive remote location.

The compromise they reached was to put both sites on the ballot.

“I remember thinking it was a horrible idea,” Baker says today. “Commissioners are put in office to make the tough decisions. I felt this court had to make one of those decisions. They did a disservice to this community by not doing so. And I felt pretty certain both (bond proposals) would be defeated in May.”

They were. The downtown jail failed 36.56 percent to 63.44 percent, while the remote jail failed 13.58 percent to 86.42 percent. Even though the “yes” votes were split between two options, more people voted against any new jail (6,378) than for either new jail (5,413).

PLANS ABANDONED

Baker and the new Commissioners Court are left to pick up the pieces. Both plans defeated at the ballot box were abandoned.

Commissioners Hampton and Fleming got an early start, convening a citizens’ task force just weeks after the bond propositions failed. In lengthy meetings throughout the summer and fall, the task force discussed the reasons for failure and how to ensure success for the next attempt at the ballot box.

“There were obvious flaws with what has happened historically with this project,” said member Gaylord Hughey at a meeting in June. “We need to have the confidence of the electorate. We have to address the credibility of the process. If we get a process in place with input that’s credible, we will get a jail.”

Last week, Baker and the Commissioners Court agreed to stick with the process developed by the task force when they agreed to hire the planning firm of Carter Goble Lee to prepare both a master plan and a jail plan. Having those plans in place will help sell the bond proposal, Baker says, because they will reassure the public the county’s looking to the future, not seeking yet another temporary fix.

“There’s a practical aspect and also a political aspect,” Baker says. “I don’t disagree with the people who say they’re tired of studies and reports. Money has been spent on those, and then no action has been taken. But I’m committed to action and I believe the court is committed to action. It’s become a crisis situation.”

The first task of the consultant will be to reconcile all of the other reports, which say Smith County needs anywhere from 900 to 1,600 new jail beds. Finding the right number is crucial to the success of a future bond election, Baker says.

“Did the last bond proposals fail because of the number of beds?” he asks. “I think there were several factors, including that. People didn’t want to spend that money today if they didn’t need the beds today.”

But there’s more to it than determining the right number of beds.

“We must also project what the rest of the criminal justice system will need,” he says. “The planner will be able to tell us things such as 10 years from now, how many courts we will we need, for example, and how many district attorneys we’ll need for the new cases.”

Task Force

The task force also has a big job ahead. Commissioners hope that once a jail plan is formulated and put on the ballot, the task force will morph into a “Vote Yes” committee that will sell the proposal to the public.

“It’s a good cross-section of the community, and they see their role as an advisory group that will also help us convince the public this is the way to go,” Baker says. “We didn’t have that in the past.”

But even with such a committee on their side, there’s no guarantee commissioners will sway the public to raise their own taxes. Baker notes there are two ways to pay for a new jail: voter-approved General Obligation bonds (GOs) and Certificates of Obligation (COs), which don’t go to the voters.

Baker notes he supports using GOs.

“My preference is to give the voters a greater sense of confidence in the process and give them an opportunity to approve it,” he says. “But there is no doubt we have to move forward. I would first want voters to approve (the bonds). But if they don’t, we still have to move forward.”

Either way, he adds, building a new jail won’t be cheap.

“We have a low tax rate, and I like that. I want it to stay low,” he says. “But we have to take some pride, to provide the services a growing community needs. There’s no question that tax rate needs to move up. And it needs to move up above the rollback rate. It’s going to be expensive, especially the first phase.”

Problems Addressed

Baker said maintenance problems at the existing facilities are being addressed.

In fact, in recent weeks those faulty security cameras, intercoms and panic buttons have been repaired, and mold and pest problems are being dealt with, which Sheriff J.B. Smith says are constant problems that inevitably occur in older buildings.

“Things continually break down over the years,” Smith said. “For example, we work on mold in the showers constantly. We wash those with high-pressure washers weekly. But we got an estimate for sealing the brick, and the contractor wanted $17,000 per stall. Instead of spending that money now, we want to see what the county is going to do about a new jail.”

It takes more than elbow grease to maintain such buildings, Baker agrees.

“We have to dedicate funds to preserve what we have, and to get rid of what’s not worth preserving,” he says. “When the tax rate goes up, we’ll have to dedicate funds for maintenance.”

Tunnel?

When asked bluntly what he wants to see, Baker’s vision is clear, at least in the broad strokes.

“I would like to see a downtown jail contiguous to the existing facilities, using the tunnel,” he says. “I would like to see enough beds to carry us through at least 10 years. And I think we have got to address the courthouse needs at the same time. We can’t just build a jail. We need to take care of the jail bed needs, the office space needs and the court space needs.”

That could mean adding onto the existing courthouse, but not replacing it, he says.

So far, even opponents of the last bond elections have been optimistic about the new court’s efforts.

“In the last month and a half there seems to be a renewed focus on the part of the Commissioners Court,” says Ken Good, an organizer of the No No Committee that helped marshal opposition.

“There now appears to be a concerted effort on the part of a majority of the court to find a solution that is acceptable to everyone. If the court continues down the path laid by Judge Baker, I am confident that a solution will be found that everyone can support.”

The clock is ticking, however. Carter Goble Lee has until July 1 to deliver its plans, and commissioners will then have until Sept. 5 to put a bond issue on the Nov. 6 ballot.

“I see us breaking ground as soon as January of 2008,” Baker says.

JAIL TIMELINE
Oct. 1855: The Smith County grand jury finds “spiritous liquors are kept and sold by a good many citizens” and recommends building a jail.

Aug.1856: Commissioners plan for jail that “shall contain two prison rooms and a suitable apartment for the jailer” not to exceed $8,000.

Feb. 1880: Because of overcrowding, the county stops accepting Tyler’s prisoners.

June 1880: A company is hired to build a jail on East Erwin for $11,239.

July 1881: Commissioners order the sheriff to repair “the hole in the wall of the new jail made by the escaping prisoners.”

Feb. 1915: The grand jury cites unsafe and unsanitary jail conditions.

July 1915: Commissioners accept a bid to build a new jail on Spring Avenue for $45,000. This jail serves needs for nearly 40 years.

Feb. 1954: Work begins on a courthouse on the square which will have jail space on the top two floors.

1973: Plans to add a seventh floor to the courthouse for more jail space is rejected.

1977: Texas Commission on Jail Standards (TCJS) cites the jail for non-compliance.

1979: Plan for a courthouse annex that includes jail space is abandoned.

May 1981: After a class action suit is filed on behalf of inmates, U.S. District Judge William Steger takes over supervision of the jail.

June 1982: Voters reject an $11.5 million jail plan.

July 1982: Steger appoints a jail task force and tells them that “since the people have spoken by their vote, it therefore is incumbent upon the Court to take action to seek a solution.”

Jan. 1983: Voters approve an $11 million plan to build a 264-bed jail on Elm Street, projected to meet needs for 20 years.

Sept. 1985: On the day the jail opens, it is full. Within two years, it is in trouble for overcrowding.

June 1988: Commissioners accept a $1.33 million bid to build a 246-bed minimum security jail just north of Tyler.

July 1989: Commissioners enter a 15-year agreement with the U.S. Marshals Service to house up to 50 federal prisoners in return for $100,000 in federal funds for jail improvements.

1994: A 192-bed medium security expansion at a site north of Tyler is opposed by some residents who unsuccessfully sue to block it.

Sept. 1997: Steger ends his supervision, saying the jail meets standards.

Jan. 2002: The jail is again cited for jail overcrowding.

Nov. 2002: At the Smith County Jail Committee’s first meeting, Sheriff J.B. Smith warns that TCJS could force prisoners be sent to other counties.

Nov. 2002: Jail Committee recommends a $40 million, 1,500-bed criminal justice complex be built north of downtown. No action is taken.

Nov. 2003: With inmate population 100 over capacity, TCJS warns the county to take immediate steps to alleviate overcrowding.

December 2003: The jail fails another inspection due to overcrowding.

May 2004: After TCJS mandate, the county starts sending inmates to Bowie County, at a cost of $40 per day, per prisoner. The cost is estimated to be upward of $1 million per year.

May 2004: A new Jail Committee recommends an $85 million, 1,464-bed criminal justice complex be built. Commissioners say that could lead to as much as a 40 percent tax rate hike and look into privatization.

June 2004: Commissioners hire a consultant who says the county could save money by letting a private firm build and run a jail.

March 2005: The Jail Committee reviews proposals from private firms who want to build the jail, but also examine the traditional design-bid-build route.

April 3, 2005: Commissioner Don Pinkerton dies in his sleep the night before he is to propose building a new jail in the traditional manner, to be run by the county. The price tag was to be between $50 and $60 million for a 912-bed facility.

May 2005: Regrouping with a new member of the court, commissioners turn back to the privatization option.

July 6, 2005: Commissioners vote to hire the private firm Corplan to begin the design phase for a $53.8 million “criminal justice center,” to include a jail.

July 12, 2005: Upon learning of legal trouble Corplan has in Willacy County, involving bribes to county officials, Smith County commissioners reject Corplan’s proposal and start over with a new Request for Proposals.

Oct. 2005: Citizens concerned that commissioners planned to move the jail outside of downtown form the Master Plan Resource Committee to demonstrate the viability of a downtown location. Local experts in real estate, development, design and land use volunteer their time to develop two options for commissioners to consider. When Option South and Option East are presented in court, commissioners respond with a polite “thank you” and no questions.

Nov. 2005: A new round of RFPs results in commissioners tapping Lee Lewis Construction and Wiginton Hooker Jeffrey Architects to build a new jail.

Jan. 4, 2006: Commissioners pick a remote site, near the northeast corner of Loop 323, for the new jail.

Jan. 23, 2006: Faced with public opposition to the remote site and a very vocal call for a downtown jail, commissioners agree to examine a “downtown option” as well.

Feb. 2006: The private firms designing and pricing the remote and downtown facilities report back with price tags of $73.4 million and $90.9 million, respectively. The downtown price is eventually scaled back to $83 million.

March 2006: Commissioners opt to put both facilities on the May 13 ballot — each proposition will require a majority of “yes” votes to pass. Commissioners begin a series of sparsely attended public hearings.

April 2006: The No No Committee forms to oppose both jail bond proposals; members cite a lack of trust in commissioners and the lack of a master facilities plan.

May 13, 2006: Voters soundly defeat both jail propositions; the downtown jail failed 36.56 percent to 63.44 percent, which the remote jail failed 13.58 percent to 86.42 percent. Even though the “yes” votes were split between two options, more people voted against any new jail (6,378) than for a new jail (5,413).

June 2006: Commissioners put together a new, broader jail committee — including members of “No No” — to try to get the jail expansion efforts back on track. Meetings break down, and by the end of the month the group is disbanded.

July 2006: A new, smaller committee is formed, though critics refer to it as County Judge Becky Dempsey’s “Yes Ma’am Committee.” It meets throughout the summer to hammer out details for a new jail bond package. Incoming County Judge Joel Baker declines to serve on the committee.

Nov. 2006: The new committee, formally dubbed the Smith County Buildings Task Force, recommends that a jail plan be developed in conjunction with a master facilities plan, and that the firm Carter Goble Lee be picked to develop both. Commissioners agree, and the county begins negotiations with CGL on the price and scope of the work.

Feb. 2007: Judge Baker, now on the court along with new Commissioner Bill McGinnis, agrees that negotiations with CGL should continue, and that a May bond election is not a realistic goal.

Sources: Tyler Paper, The Chronicles of Smith County, Smith County Historical Society, local attorney Randy Gilbert.

Kenneth Dean covers police, fire, public safety organizations. He can be reached at 903.596.6353. e-mail:news@tylerpaper.com

Roy Maynard covers county government and politics. He can be reached at 903.596.6291. e-mail: roymaynardtmt@gmail.com

WAITING FOR A DRINK: An inmate waits for his drink to be handed to him while in his solitary confinement cell at the Smith County Jail.
(Staff Photo By Amy Peterson)