Portage County Government Center & Facilities LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER ASSESSMENT REVIEW Presentation to Portage County Board of Supervisors September 18th, 2018 Calvin Winters; Procurement Director, Portage County Bob Prell; Owner’s Representative, ICS Consulting Inc. Mark Ludgatis; Principal Secure Environments, BWBR Bruce Omtvedt; Planner - Associate Secure Environments, Dewberry

Brief History of Notable Actions Relative to the LEC 1990: Current jail was constructed on the corner of Arlington Place and Strongs Avenue. The jail opened with a maximum capacity of 87 inmates (effectively 74 inmates due to Department of Corrections guidelines). 1995: One Huber area of the jail was converted to juvenile housing. Lowering the jail capacity to 79 inmates (effectively 67 inmates due to DOC guidelines). The County looked into a joint Huber facility with Wood County. After two years of study and review, this option was set aside due to language in the state statutes which put constraints on the viability of this project. 1996: Gremmer OHM Twohig & Due LLC conducted a space need analysis. 1997: Jail was over capacity. County was advised to ship prisoners to other nearby county jails. 1999: Shipping prisoners to other nearby counties began. The Kimme Study “A Jail Needs Assessment Study” was commissioned and completed. Final study recommended building a 200-bed facility. This facility would have been connected with an overhead walkway to the current court house. 11 houses would have been removed in order to build the new facility. The removal of neighborhood housing was met with negativity and the plan was deemed implausible. This was the first year that Portage County failed to bring in revenue for housing other counties’ inmates.  

History of LEC (continued) 1999/2000: County worked with the architect who designed and built the current court house. Explored adding a third floor along with filling in other portions of the building to provide for a square configuration. All options had serious limitations and were deemed inadequate for addressing long term-space needs (must accommodate growth over a period of 50 years+). Finding additional parking space was also considered. 2001: Resolution adopted that any future jail project must be physically connected to the Courts, Court-related offices, and Law Enforcement offices. 2003/2004: DLR “Long Range Planning Study” was completed for the County. (first attempt at a “master plan” that ties everything together for one unified approach). This study looked at all space needs in the County’s government departments. Courtroom design and security were noted as serious concerns. Standards for courtroom design (safety) have changed over time making retro-fitting the current courtroom problematic. Portage County Board of Supervisors passed a resolution establishing the need to study, review, and implement a new jail facility as the #1 priority for Portage County. 2005: Portage County Board went on record supporting the co-location of the courts and Jail in any future building project.

History of LEC (continued) 2006: Goldman Study was commissioned for a needs assessment process for all Justice Center/related functions. Study recommended all departments envisioned to be housed in a new justice center facility. Asserted that new facility must be flexible, expandable, and accessible over a projected life of 50+ years. 2007/2008: Venture Architects were hired by the County to complete a pre-design phase of the planning project. 2010: The County Board approved a stop-gap security plan for the Courthouse, and that temporary plan remains in effect today. 2011: The Sheriff’s office submitted a capital improvement request to address some of the issues in the LEC. Those projects were put on hold pending future action for a new facility. 2012: Resolution adopted endorsing a concept of construction: unified correctional institution in a single structure connected or incorporated with the Courts. DECLARED aspiration to begin construction in 2015. The Sheriff’s Office resubmitted capital improvement requests to address some of the issues in the LEC. Those projects were put on hold pending future action for a new facility.

History of LEC (continued) 2013: The Sheriff’s Office resubmitted capital improvement requests to address some of the issues in the LEC. Those projects were put on hold pending future action for a new facility. 2014: A staff work group was instituted by the Space and Properties Committee to assist in the development of a new facility concept. Resolution adopted approving the purchase of 1039 Ellis Street property for $1.9 million. The Sheriff’s Office resubmitted capital improvement requests to address some of the issues in the LEC. Those projects were put on hold pending future action for a new facility. 2015: Resolution adopted that such a future construction project, if approved by this Board at some future date regarding the courts, jail, Sheriff’s Office and any other facilities chosen to be a part of the project, shall be located on the property owned by Portage County (1039 Ellis Street). Venture Architects hired to complete and update Justice Center Study confirming the previously-identified deficiencies in the current facility. The new facility work group transitioned their project work and issue to the Space and Properties Committee and disbanded. 2016: The Sheriff’s Office resubmitted capital improvement requests to address some of the issues in the LEC. Those projects were put on hold pending future action for a new facility.

History of LEC (continued) 2017: Resolution adopted endorsing the Space and Properties Committee to move forward with a new Government Facility building. Resolution adopted approving the contract with ICS Consulting, Inc. to provide Owner’s Representative services on building/renovation project Sheriff’s Office submitted a capital improvements request to address issues in the LEC. The project was funded for $25,000 to examine the current facility, develop a concept for possible improvements and expansion, and create a prioritized list of improvements along with estimated costs. 2018: Resolution adopted authorizing an agreement with BWBR Architects/Dewberry to provide architectural and engineering design services. June 2018: County held first public open house to discuss the new Government Project. Hunt & Mead, along with BWBR Architects/Dewberry, was also awarded the contact for LEC improvement planning.  

History of LEC (continued) INDIVIDUAL STUDIES AND REPORT COSTS: 1997: Kimme & Associates $12,768.90 1998: The Kimme & Associates $12,212.00 2004: DLR Group $32,500.00 2005: Mark Goldman & Assoc. $149,502.96 2007: Venture Architects $103,500.00 2008: Venture Architects $11,500.00 2009: Venture Architects $19,342.00 2010: Venture Architects $1,018.00 2014: Venture Architects $12,000.00 2015: Venture Architects $26,006.73 2017: Venture Architects $24,950.00 2018: ICS Consulting, Inc. $30,133.65 2018: BWBR Architects/Dewberry $24,500.00 TOTAL REPORT COSTS $459,934.24

History of LEC (continued) INMATE TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING COSTS TO NEARBY COUNTY FACILITIES 1999-2016 $9,531,787 Cost for 2017 $ 587,037.00 TOTAL TRANSPORT COSTS $ 10,118,824

OVERVIEW OF PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Information based on report prepared by BWBR / Dewberry August 2018 Meetings with LEC staff and administration Review of the PCSO Capital Improvement Plan submitted February 27, 2018 CIP Funding minimum of $10 Million as placeholder for critical improvements. Site visit and detailed physical assessment Mechanical and electrical physical assessment completed by Mead & Hunt Engineers Program analysis completed by BWBR/Dewberry Budget and cost analysis prepared by CPMI and reviewed by ICS Consulting, Inc. Draft report summary presented to Space & Properties Committee September 4, 2018

OVERVIEW OF PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Recap of major key issues Does not meet today’s standards and code requirements ADA upgrades ACA Standards Wisconsin DOC 350 Deferred Maintenance Mechanical / electrical systems have reached it’s useful life expectancy of 15-30 years Inadequate size/space Cells Immediate need of 139 beds vs. existing 79 beds Administration space Storage space EOC (Emergency Operations Center) space Sally Port space and function

OVERVIEW OF PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Recap of major key issues (continued) Security concerns for staff and inmates Sight lines Need for segregated housing Separate Juvenile Detention Intake and Release Function Intake and receiving (booking) Sally Port Size and security / safety concerns Added services required, not currently included in existing facility Medical Cells Ambulance accessible Secure Vehicle Sally port (garage) Daily Huber processing areas Special management cells EMS /EOC Medical Examiner Adult or Juvenile outdoor exercise areas

POSSIBLE 10 YEAR PLAN

POSSIBLE 10 YEAR PLAN

POSSIBLE CONCEPT 10 YEAR PLAN Recap of renovation and additions - PHASING Numerous phases of work over a likely 3 year timeframe Work needs to be completed while facility is operate 24/7 Replace LEC Garage and Emergency Generator before you can start Juvenile, Booking, and 12 bed Jail Addition. LEC Addition & cut-over of E911 Dispatch before renovations of LEC. New Vehicle Sallyport and Booking must be built before you can create a Rec. Yard in old VSP and renovate the core areas. New Juvenile Detention must be completed and move Juveniles before re-purposing that space to Huber.  

POSSIBLE CONCEPT 10 YEAR PLAN RECAP  Recap of renovation and additions – OPERATIONAL IMPACTS 10 Year plan will not address current and future needs Add 26 beds – New 12-bed Classification Pod and Replace 14 Juvenile beds 105 beds is short of the immediate need of 139 beds 10 year need of 165-170 beds, with master plan for projections of 300+ beds. 10 Year plan will not address all code and standard requirements 10 Year plan will not address all size and space requirements such as: Medical Cells Special Management Cells Staff or inmate capacity Medical Examiner Vehicular Evidence processing Fleet management

POSSIBLE CONCEPT 10 YEAR PLAN RECAP  Recap of renovation and additions _- COST IMPACTS The out-of-County Housing & Transport costs will INCREASE during a probable 3 years of phased construction. Each housing unit is a phased shut-down for detention & systems work, to continue to operate with a staggered loss of bed space. 10 Year Plan anticipated construction costs of $26M

RECCOMENDATION Board action stating that Portage County accepts the assessment of serious limitations of the current LEC to serve this community, therefore will not invest funds in the a 10-Year-Plan of expansion and renovations to “get by” in the current LEC. Plan for the replacement of the LEC with Adult and Juvenile Detention Service included in the consolidated master plan of a coordinated Downtown Government Center Campus. Allocate funds for limited scope of immediate repairs & boarding funds to operate LEC for 3 years, required for the design and construction of a New LEC. PCSO will notify the WIDOC of formal board action to build, and will seek input of the WIDOC Office of Detention Facilities to assist in a coordinated minimal scope of LEC building repairs required to operate. Under Chapters DOC 350, 348, and 346 at the LEC prior to move of inmates into a new LEC/Jail/JDC. Define the Government Center Master Plan’s critical path sequence of construction. The annual boarding expenses and our observations state the LEC site will benefit the 50 year master planned Government Center and put the LEC on the critical path of development when that site area is considered with the site areas north of Arlington Place. Consideration of the proper construction sequencing of Courthouse, Government Offices, and LEC is key to the success of the Government Center project. Design a 50-Year LEC Plan to meet current and future needs. Begin with detailed space programming. Initial operational reviews have been completed for the LEC Space Program validation, which uncovered significant gaps in the building space allocations “recipe.” Space allocations will be prioritized to further define immediate vs. long term needs. This will identify and “right-size” the initial LEC construction scope and future expansions to master plan the campus to accept.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS DO NOTHING Continued out-of-pocket costs Not meeting community needs Not accepting responsibility Security/safety concerns High legal liability exposure Impedes the professional tactical response of the Portage County Sheriff’s Office when providing essential services to the community

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 10 YEAR PLAN The 10-year Plan is truly a 7-Year plan with a band aid fix 3 years of construction with numerous disruptions and conflicts Continued out-of-pocket transportation costs Doesn’t meet immediate of future needs Short 139 beds Long-term projection needs show between 165-170 beds with up to 300 beds in the future Will not address all code and standard requirements Will not address all size and space needs Anticipated construction costs in excess of $26 Million Plus additional operational and housing costs directly related to construction

Conclusion Accepting responsibility to provide essential Law Enforcement, Detention, Emergency Medical Services with consolidated E911 Dispatch Communications & EOC Services to meet daily security/safety concerns of juveniles, adult inmates, staff and the public requires the investment in basic facility needs to perform those jobs.