• strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_argument.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_node_status::operator_form() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::operator_form(&$form, &$form_state) in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/modules/node/views_handler_filter_node_status.inc on line 0.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/glencoenews/www/www/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 906.

County makes right decision on jail

On a 4-1 vote at its Feb. 16 meeting, the McLeod County Board of Commissioners approved construction bids for its proposed jail expansion and courthouse security project.
We well remember that in 2007, the then County Board made a last-minute decision to scrap a proposed $23 million project that would have added 60 beds to the jail.
It was a wise decision then, but many of the issues that faced the jail didn’t go away with the abandonment of the project. The Department of Corrections still pushed for better program space and the improvement of a variety of other issues.
In the past couple of years, those needs moved to the front burner from the back burner, to which it had been relegated.
Commissioners began consideration of a more modest project that would add jail space, eliminating the need to contract with other jails to house inmates, and correct the program space issues. The new proposal also addressed security needs in the courthouse, including a secure hallway in which to transport inmates to one of the upstairs courtrooms.
Unfortunately, the first round of bids for the new proposal came in well over budget. In fact, about $2 million over budget. And the County Board went back to the drawing board, again.
It hired a construction management firm, scaled back the project again, and went out for bids, again. This time, they came in more favorably, and the County Board voted to move forward.
We agree with that decision based on a couple of factors.
Most notably, the project will make use of the over $4 million bequest left to the county from the estate of Annamarie Tudhope. That money can only be used for jail construction. While the county could have tabled the project still further, it’s unlikely the interest on the estate money would have kept pace with inflation. There would have been an ever-increasing gap between the fund and construction costs.
Second, despite the higher costs, the county is able to do the project without increasing its levy. Between the bequest and the use of reserves, the project will cash flow.
Commissioner Doug Krueger cast the dissenting vote on accepting the bids, and we agree with his concern about depleting the reserves. The county has been using reserves for years to keep down the levy, and it’s time for it to take a hard look at this practice.
Regardless, the County Board made the right decision in proceeding with this project. It’s maximizing the gift from the Tudhope estate and minimizing the impact on taxpayers.
You can’t ask for more than that.