Nichols, Terrill bill would derail jail proposal

OKLAHOMA CITY -- A Senate bill -- which passed the House of Representatives late this week and is working its way back through the state legislature -- could force Cleveland County Commissioners to again alter their plans for a proposed new detention facility.

Senate Bill 896, authored by Sen. Johnathon Nichols, R-Norman, and Moore Republican Randy Terrill, would prevent three counties -- Oklahoma, Tulsa and Cleveland -- from building a jail "within a two-mile radius of any elementary or secondary school or technology center site."

That language, contained in section two of the two-page, Jail-Free School Zone Act, would prevent county commissioners from purchasing land near the Moore Norman Technology Center and building a new detention center there.

The measure also would force the commission to either expand the current facility or build a new jail within one mile of the old one -- in downtown Norman.

At present, commissioners are looking at three different plots of land for the jail, including a 30-acre area at Franklin Road and 24th Avenue NW.

The legislation is the second attempt in less than a month by state lawmakers to prevent a detention facility from being built in far north Cleveland County.

In March, Nichols amended House Bill 1776, in an effort to prevent the facility from being built along Franklin Road.

That bill -- which passed the House of Representatives on a 99-0 vote -- would have required counties with populations of more than 150,000 to get the consent of two-thirds of an area's property owners before a detention facility could be built. However, the language containing the jail location provision was later removed.

The latest bill -- originally passed in March by the state Senate with different language and a different House author -- was heavily amended in the House Judiciary and Public Safety Committee on April 12. At that time, the measure's House author, Norman Rep. Scott Martin, was removed and replaced by Terrill.

Both measures have drawn the wrath of Cleveland County Commission chair George Skinner.

"They (Terrill and Nichols) are gonna cause the taxpayers to pay a lot more money for a jail," Skinner said. "With this bill, there's not a place in the county that you can build it -- no matter where we look, we couldn't build anywhere except downtown."

Should that happen, Skinner said, the cost of the facility would jump by almost $3 million.

"It would take about $2.5 million just to buy out five businesses," he said. "And another $500,000 to tear down the old buildings."

Those costs, Skinner said, would be in addition to the cost of construction.

"It doesn't make any sense. We could buy property away from the downtown area for $1 million or so. It would be a lot cheaper."

The bill for the facility could go even higher should the delays continue.

Twice last year, state inspectors warned commissioners about the jail's inmate population. Then, in February 2006, Don Garrison, the state health department's jail inspector, gave the county 45 days to develop a plan to solve the overcrowding problem.

If the inmate population wasn't reduced, Garrison said, the county could be hit with fines of up to $10,000 per day for noncompliance with health and safety standards -- or state officials could ask the attorney general to close the facility.

"The jail is a hazard to employees and county citizens," Garrison told commissioners last year. "Now it's up to you guys."

Since then, the facility has continued to exceed inmate population limits and the state has continued its scrutiny.

"We know that it takes a long time to address these issues," said Ted Evans, the state health department's chief of consumer health. "Especially when it deals with getting funding from taxpayers."

And while Evans said Cleveland County's jail was "not in real bad shape, just overcrowded," he did confirm health department officials have "for the past several months" been reviewing the jail with their legal department.

"We're watching closely," he said. "But if they (the county) hit a big road block, we'll probably step in and take some type of action."

That action could include issuing an administrative compliance order and assessing a daily fine.

Terrill said neither he nor Nichols was "specifically aware of the all the details" surrounding the jail; but chided the commission for not involving state lawmakers.

"Neither Senator Nichols nor I were asked to participate," he said. "We were not contacted until today (Thursday). I would think the commission would want input from all parties, particularly those officials who represent large amounts of people in the area."

Terrill said he had "serious public safety concerns" about jails being located in proximity to elementary schools, secondary schools and career tech facilities.

"I'm not sure why we shouldn't have the same restrictions (such as those for sex offenders) with facilities that house these people," he said. "Jails house bad people."

In addition to his issues about public safety, Terrill said he was concerned about the jail's possible impact on the residents of the Franklin Road area.

"The people along Franklin Road never contemplated a jail in the area," he said, while those residents and business located near the present jail "knew what they were getting into when they bought there."

And state lawmakers, he said, should be involved in the decision on the jail's location.

"We haven't had an opportunity to provide our input," he said. "It's my hope this issue is not about the concern of some of the people in the immediate vicinity of where that jail has been located for an extended period of time."

Still, all sides agree something must be done about the jail, and that decision must come soon.

"It's a difficult situation," Skinner said. "We've looked everywhere for a location. We looked at the property up by York, but some people called Sen. Nichols about it. I understand he is doing this to protect those people, but they are not the only people in this district."