Vote 'No' on super jail
POSTED: October 30, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/517401/Vote--No--on-super-jail.html?nav=5092
To the editor:
The proposed Justice Center is too big, too expensive, at the wrong time, and in the wrong place. Voting "No" for this super jail tells our county commissioners to develop a better, cheaper, smarter plan.
Too Big - the Justice Center committee lists four forces that could decrease demand for jail beds. The most important issue is the slow rate of population growth in our area. The population of Houghton County has been stable for more than 50 years (1970 = 34,652 vs 2009 = 35,333), but the plan more than triples the current size to a 110-bed jail. In fact, Marquette County only has an 80-bed jail even though their population is nearly twice that of Houghton County, and Marquette is a U.S. District Court.
Too Expensive - the $15 million Justice Center plan is an unlimited bond and does not include increased operating costs. Remember, the county's loan has to be paid no matter what; when our house values decrease, we will pay more taxes. This super jail does not fit with our small-town values.
People in our county pride themselves on living resourcefully, and this is nothing to be proud of.
Wrong Time - the global economic recession has directly affected our community and this is not the time to increase taxes. The Department of Corrections is planning to close prisons and the state of Michigan Judiciary Committee is even looking at eliminating district courts in small counties like Houghton.
Wrong Place - locating a large jail near the growing downtown area and in a family neighborhood is a step backwards. Camp Kitwen is a cost-effective option that will create local jobs. The wood furnace will be a long term cost savings as the price of natural gas, propane, and electricity continues to rise. Video conferencing for arraignments and a satellite office in the courthouse would save money.
Contrary to the committee's sourcebook, the Department of Corrections has stated, via Representative Lahti's chief of staff, that the state has no need for Camp Kitwen and it would be in our county's best interest to lease the jail for $1 per year.
A super jail in the center of town is not the right plan for our family-friendly community. Because the jail committee did not come to the public for advice, our only option is to vote "No." To get informed, visit www.houghtoncountyjusticecenter.com.
CRAIG MAKENS
Houghton
The proposed Justice Center is too big, too expensive, at the wrong time, and in the wrong place. Voting "No" for this super jail tells our county commissioners to develop a better, cheaper, smarter plan.
Too Big - the Justice Center committee lists four forces that could decrease demand for jail beds. The most important issue is the slow rate of population growth in our area. The population of Houghton County has been stable for more than 50 years (1970 = 34,652 vs 2009 = 35,333), but the plan more than triples the current size to a 110-bed jail. In fact, Marquette County only has an 80-bed jail even though their population is nearly twice that of Houghton County, and Marquette is a U.S. District Court.
Too Expensive - the $15 million Justice Center plan is an unlimited bond and does not include increased operating costs. Remember, the county's loan has to be paid no matter what; when our house values decrease, we will pay more taxes. This super jail does not fit with our small-town values.
People in our county pride themselves on living resourcefully, and this is nothing to be proud of.
Wrong Time - the global economic recession has directly affected our community and this is not the time to increase taxes. The Department of Corrections is planning to close prisons and the state of Michigan Judiciary Committee is even looking at eliminating district courts in small counties like Houghton.
Wrong Place - locating a large jail near the growing downtown area and in a family neighborhood is a step backwards. Camp Kitwen is a cost-effective option that will create local jobs. The wood furnace will be a long term cost savings as the price of natural gas, propane, and electricity continues to rise. Video conferencing for arraignments and a satellite office in the courthouse would save money.
Contrary to the committee's sourcebook, the Department of Corrections has stated, via Representative Lahti's chief of staff, that the state has no need for Camp Kitwen and it would be in our county's best interest to lease the jail for $1 per year.
A super jail in the center of town is not the right plan for our family-friendly community. Because the jail committee did not come to the public for advice, our only option is to vote "No." To get informed, visit www.houghtoncountyjusticecenter.com.
CRAIG MAKENS
Houghton
----------
Jail proposal contains problems
POSTED: October 23, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/512315.html?nav=5004
To the editor:Your "no" vote on the proposed new justice center means you do not accept the proposed 50,000-square-foot building, 32,000 of that being for incarceration facilities, or a total of 110 beds, the location, or the proposed millage.
Read carefully the wording of the ballot as it states besides the millage, it is for unlimited taxable bonds to pay for construction, equipping and furnishing the proposed building. This is essentially open for further taxation.
How can one witness the endless lines at the food pantry, homelessness, know that there are local citizens that have no insurance, medical attention, money for winter fuel, yet the county commissioners ask for more taxes? How can we in good conscience lay off teachers and cut school programs and vote favorably for an outlandishly large incarceration facility?
In viewing the pictures of the jail in the Gazette, how many Houghton County residents who live below or at poverty level have conditions much better than these themselves? Can these people tolerate more taxes?
Hancock's city manager cannot promise jobs to our local contractors if this building is built, as by law the jobs will go to whichever contractor is the lowest bidder, wherever they are from.
The League of Women Voters said they had a representative on the jail committee, yes, the co-chair, who is a wife of a commissioner. How non-partisan and unbiased is that?
The sheriff says he does not think we will get inmates from other counties, but he also stated that the prisons have downsized 9,000 inmates, and jail populations have increased by 30 percent. With 110 beds to fill, build this new jail; and they will come. Who will these inmates be, where will they come from, and where will they go after their incarceration in our jail?
In the coverage by The Daily Mining Gazette, the third article of the three about the justice center is one sided, there are no opinions from the people.
Recently, Marquette County leased an idled 80-bed facility from the state of Michigan for $1 a year. Their county worked with the people for solutions to have a win-win situation.
Why weren't we as citizens involved with the jail committee from the beginning?
Why was it a select few people meeting for almost four years without the input of the public?
Why are there no options and no choices?
Mary Ann Predebon
Houghton
----------
Justice Center too much
POSTED: October 21, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/512293.html?nav=5004
To the editor:
After reading the article in the Oct. 19 paper, one would have to wonder if our local commissioners are thinking with their heads or taxpayers' dollars.First, from the pictures that were posted in the paper it appears that our old jail is being neglected and not maintained properly. A can of paint and a brush(es) and an inmate assigned for this detail, would certainly put a new light on this situation and cost probably around $200 dollars, including a new toilet.
Secondly, about safety to the public etc., this could easily be taken care of by putting in video conferencing equipment in the jail and court house, there is no reason an inmate on arraignments has to be brought in the court room for this. One deputy could easily handle numerous arraignments from the safety of the jail, while keeping the inmate locked up.
Attorneys can also walk over to the jail and interview their clients in the jail not in the hallways of the court. It's convenient for the judge and attorney to have them in court. Really, the only time an inmate has to go to court is for a formal trial or to plead on criminal charges and sentencings, usually in Circuit Court.
Thirdly, upgrading according to the honorable Judge Wisti who commented on the Schoolcraft jail. Hmm. $50,000 to bring their jail up to Michigan standards. Houghton County Jail is at least twice the size of the Schoolcraft jail. Hmm. $100,000 maybe to bring it up to standard. (Cheaper than $15 million). (Where is it written that our jail has to be five-star quality?)
A second floor could be built above the original jail to house citizens who break the law. Cheaper than $15 million? You bet. Camp Kitwin could also be upgraded for a lot less than $15 million.
Remember, the bigger the county jail, the more staff, food, heat, electricity, up-keep, etc., will be needed and that equals more taxes down the road.
Let's face it, it sounds like our local government is following the foot steps of our big spenders in Washington. They talk like a million or billion dollars is chump change. Just let the taxpayers take care of it. The way the economy is, we need a new jail like we need a new debt.
Laura Kinnunen
Atlantic Mine
----------
People need to know the truth
POSTED: October 20, 2010
http://www.mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/512264.html?nav=5004
To the editor:There will be no justice, in the Justice Center, if there is no truth in taxation.
The truth is: For years the state of Michigan has had a cost-cutting plan, that would eliminate the 97th District Court entirely.
The truth is: Garfield Hood came into a Houghton County Board meeting and informed the Houghton County Board of this fact.
The truth is: The Houghton County Board, hasn't informed the people of Houghton County, as to this fact.
The truth: This is a fact, the people of Houghton County need, to make an informed decision.
The Justice Center committee claims "We the People," are being misinformed, and they are right, withholding information is misinformation.
Ben Jaehnig
Hancock
----------
Justice Center concerns told
POSTED: October 19, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/512238.html?nav=5004
To the editor:Perhaps voters are not aware that the millage for the Justice Center can be increased without voter approval. At the Houghton County Board of Commissioners July 13 meeting the one commissioner who voted against the bond proposition stated the board can increase the millage above the planned 1.3 mills without voter's approval. The reason given is by the time the vote occurs and the construction bid is complete interest rates are likely to have gone up. Because the bond amount of $15 million over 30 years is fixed the millage would have to increase.
The concern is not so much that the interest may go up but that they can increase the millage without voter's approval.
It has been published that a home valued at $100,000 would cost a resident $44.40. However the taxable value of 50 percent at 1.3 mills equals $65 per year. The planned Justice Center is 50,000 square feet with a 110 bed jail occupying 32,000 square feet. A major concern with the financial planning of the Justice Center is no operational or maintenance costs were included in the $15 million. The total beds of the existing jail and work camp combined is 54. The planned jail with 110 beds is a 51 percent increase. The sheriff publically stated that our jail has never been at full capacity. In addition according to the Justice Center sourcebook "net jail costs will be lowered if beds are rented." Do we really want to bring criminals into a complex in the center of Houghton in order to fill the beds of a huge jail that to date has never filled all of its beds?
I noted that most of the letters to the editor opposing the Justice Center, including this one, are opposed to the proposed location, not the need to update the jail. We are being asked to support a large Justice Center (jail) at a time when the economy is still fragile with many without jobs or facing other financial hardships and with the likelihood of increased State and Federal taxes. This is not the time to increase our millage. Instead we need an unbiased analysis regarding alternative locations for a jail. I ask that you vote no on the ballot proposal for the $15 million Justice Center in order for the community to have time to consider alternative location proposals.
Bill Predebon Sr.
Houghton
----------
Give us jail alternatives
POSTED: October 19, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/512240.html?nav=5004
To the editor:After careful consideration and discussions with other concerned citizens and taxpayers of the county, I have reached the decision to vote "no" on the Justice Center proposal.
While I believe we are in dire need of improved conditions at our local jail and court facilities and fully support our law enforcement professionals, I cannot support the plan proposed by the Houghton County law enforcement sub-committee's study committee. I have heard some alternate solutions and cannot believe that there are not several more viable solutions to this dilemma.
I have observed representatives of the committee's sub-committee during one of their recent presentations to voters conclude that they would apparently have citizens and taxpayers believe that a "no" vote is short-sighted, selfish and contrary to true community spirit. I think that I speak for many other concerned citizens who simply want a comprehensive list of viable alternatives from which to choose. We do not want to be labeled as tight-fisted obstructionists simply because we are not ready to accept this single proposal offered by a sub-committee whose agenda appears narrowly focused at best.
Give us a short list of workable alternatives we will sort them out and enthusiastically support the needs of our law enforcement community with a "yes" vote and our tax dollars for the right solution.
Tom Ex
Hancock
----------
Update current jail
POSTED: October 16, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/512191.html?nav=5004
To the editor:An update of the jail and historic court house is all that is needed. The cost of a new $15 million facility would raise your taxes far more than what the county board has stated. Plus, the double operating costs of such a large facility and the operating cost of the present jail and court house, or do they plan to destroy the historic court house? Don't be fooled - just vote "no."
Bob Lean
Bootjack
----------
Think outside the box
POSTED: October 15, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/512171.html?nav=5004
To the editor:It seems that every time there is a request for a millage increase that will add to our property tax, they say, "It's just the price of a pizza." This time the Justice Center is asking for a two-pizza special at $33 per year. But how many years will that be for - 30?
I can only think that any one over 50 years old will be paying for the prison the rest of their life.
If you are a renter and think that this won't affect you - think again. A landlord can only absorb so much and then t hey have to pass that increase on to the renters. It affects us all.
There are many buildings that are very old here in the states and abroad that are made very well and still in use today - sometimes made better than new construction. We taxpayers just spent a lot of money in the past few years on the courthouse, which stands as an icon in the county. Also, when I go there, I never see a waiting line or take a number before you can come in. It seems to accommodate anyone who needs to use it.
If this three-person committee wants to be fair and get tax payer input - why not have an open house at the prison just past Painesdale and have the media (TV-6, radio, Gazette) there to cover a tour and ask people what they would like to see and if this facility could take the overflow problem they seem to be having in Houghton and near by counties.
In this economy we have to start using what we have and think outside the box a little.
Gerald Lamppa
Traprock Valley
----------
City should buy land
POSTED: October 9, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/512063.html?nav=5004
To the editor:A decade ago the residents of Houghton county rejected a cheaper proposal to build a jail at the site currently proposed for vote in November. A bigger facility with higher cost has not made the current jail proposal more attractive.
I accept the need to build a modern jail and court that meets state regulation. But extrapolating this need as a justification to build an expensive, large jail complex in the middle of a residential neighborhood that could potentially become a regional jail is unacceptable.
What do you think will be the impact if a murderer were to escape in an area full of family homes, student rentals, hotels and businesses in close proximity? Don't you think such thoughts will cross the minds of families planning to buy a home in the neighborhood, or a parent staying at a hotel near by who have brought their child to look at Michigan Tech/Finlandia as a potential college, or a tourist walking downtown?
Several years ago, the city of Houghton went head on with the Houghton County proposal of resurrecting a railway line that would pass through residential areas. The city eventually bought the right of way because a railway line would have negatively impacted the property values, and hence the city tax base. Here is another Houghton County proposal that will adversely affect Houghton city residents quality of life and property values. The Houghton City Council should take a similar stand as it did with the railway line right of way. The city should buy the proposed jail site property from the county and consider options that would complement its effort to make downtown and the surrounding areas more attractive.
I urge the readers to vote against the jail proposal and tell the Houghton City Council to buy the land from the county.
Madhukar Vable
Houghton
----------
Justice Center plan not right
POSTED: October 4, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/511995.html?nav=5004
To the editor:
After attending a presentation and question-and-answer session on the proposed new Justice Center, I must oppose it in its current form.
There are four substantial flaws in the existing proposal:
1. There is no justification for assuming our community will suffer a 400 percent increase in crime in the near or even distant future to justify replacing a 26-bed jail with a 120-bed jail.
2. There is no discussion of future community costs for maintaining a larger center (cleaning, insurance, heating/cooling or supporting 100 new inmates' food, dental/medical needs).
3. If there is no money to pay for additional guards to securely escort 26 prisoners from point A to point B, then how will we secure and maintain 120 prisoners who will not be confined to cells 24 hours a day.
4. If we have 120 jail beds and our local crime does not rise what will be done? Will we give jail sentences to our neighbors who commit misdemeanors that used to receive fines or community service sentences, or will we bring in criminals from elsewhere to fill the empty space?
A new Justice Center may be worthwhile, but we should not be presented with a choice of do nothing or accept a 120-bed center. The community that is being asked to pay for this should have more input regarding our need for and willingness to increase jail size.
We should be presented with several alternatives to choose from based on honest and complete assessments of community needs, and construction and maintenance costs for renovation and for a new building with the same or slightly more beds based on our community needs.
Patricia Heiden
Houghton
After attending a presentation and question-and-answer session on the proposed new Justice Center, I must oppose it in its current form.
There are four substantial flaws in the existing proposal:
1. There is no justification for assuming our community will suffer a 400 percent increase in crime in the near or even distant future to justify replacing a 26-bed jail with a 120-bed jail.
2. There is no discussion of future community costs for maintaining a larger center (cleaning, insurance, heating/cooling or supporting 100 new inmates' food, dental/medical needs).
3. If there is no money to pay for additional guards to securely escort 26 prisoners from point A to point B, then how will we secure and maintain 120 prisoners who will not be confined to cells 24 hours a day.
4. If we have 120 jail beds and our local crime does not rise what will be done? Will we give jail sentences to our neighbors who commit misdemeanors that used to receive fines or community service sentences, or will we bring in criminals from elsewhere to fill the empty space?
A new Justice Center may be worthwhile, but we should not be presented with a choice of do nothing or accept a 120-bed center. The community that is being asked to pay for this should have more input regarding our need for and willingness to increase jail size.
We should be presented with several alternatives to choose from based on honest and complete assessments of community needs, and construction and maintenance costs for renovation and for a new building with the same or slightly more beds based on our community needs.
Patricia Heiden
Houghton
----------
Alternatives need attention
POSTED: October 1, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/511955.html?nav=5004
To the editor:
After touring the current jail facility, many shortcomings in dire need of being addressed are apparent. These shortcomings have the potential to impact the safety of our law enforcement staff, our citizens and the inmates. These same safety concerns are present at the courthouse.
The question is what should be done to remedy these safety concerns? And how do we address issues such as cost containment, neighborhood integrity and workload for the sheriff's department?
Unfortunately, a true cost analysis has not been done regarding alternative solutions. Why? There are many more alternatives than the ones proposed in the Sourcebook. For example, the city of Houghton has received large sums of grant money to restore downtown. The courthouse is a beautiful historical building that warrants preservation. Why hasn't the county applied for state or federal grants to properly remodel the courthouse, thereby, making it aesthetically pleasing while ensuring the safety of staff and visitors of the court? The funds are available.The Union Building in Calumet is receiving $5 million from the ARRA. A new stand-alone jail would be drastically cheaper than the proposed justice center.
Per the Justice Committee's Sourcebook, Baraga's new jail usage quickly accelerated once the new jail was opened. Are we to expect the same? Our population has decreased approximately 2 percent jails are overcrowded? Any money saved by the county should be used to bring quality jobs to the area. Lower unemployment equals lower jail use.
As the state continues early release of increasingly violent offenders, we should consider the schools nearby. Recently, we learned how easily it is for an escapee to blend into the city milieu, making recapture difficult. Less than 24 hours prior to the escape, I toured that jail facility where my concerns regarding the numerous escape routes were minimized as being implausible.
We are being asked to support the new justice center in a time when many are having financial hardships, jobs are in question and an increase in state and federal taxes looks certain. It has been implied that if we do not support the proposed Justice Center, then the State Department of Corrections will sanction the county, thereby turning the blame of a failed solution to the voters. A good solution ensures the safety of all parties involved while also being passable at the ballot box. Be aware that many alternative solutions exist that have not been fully investigated.
Kimberly Salmi
Houghton
----------
Justice Center needs better spot
After touring the current jail facility, many shortcomings in dire need of being addressed are apparent. These shortcomings have the potential to impact the safety of our law enforcement staff, our citizens and the inmates. These same safety concerns are present at the courthouse.
The question is what should be done to remedy these safety concerns? And how do we address issues such as cost containment, neighborhood integrity and workload for the sheriff's department?
Unfortunately, a true cost analysis has not been done regarding alternative solutions. Why? There are many more alternatives than the ones proposed in the Sourcebook. For example, the city of Houghton has received large sums of grant money to restore downtown. The courthouse is a beautiful historical building that warrants preservation. Why hasn't the county applied for state or federal grants to properly remodel the courthouse, thereby, making it aesthetically pleasing while ensuring the safety of staff and visitors of the court? The funds are available.The Union Building in Calumet is receiving $5 million from the ARRA. A new stand-alone jail would be drastically cheaper than the proposed justice center.
Per the Justice Committee's Sourcebook, Baraga's new jail usage quickly accelerated once the new jail was opened. Are we to expect the same? Our population has decreased approximately 2 percent jails are overcrowded? Any money saved by the county should be used to bring quality jobs to the area. Lower unemployment equals lower jail use.
As the state continues early release of increasingly violent offenders, we should consider the schools nearby. Recently, we learned how easily it is for an escapee to blend into the city milieu, making recapture difficult. Less than 24 hours prior to the escape, I toured that jail facility where my concerns regarding the numerous escape routes were minimized as being implausible.
We are being asked to support the new justice center in a time when many are having financial hardships, jobs are in question and an increase in state and federal taxes looks certain. It has been implied that if we do not support the proposed Justice Center, then the State Department of Corrections will sanction the county, thereby turning the blame of a failed solution to the voters. A good solution ensures the safety of all parties involved while also being passable at the ballot box. Be aware that many alternative solutions exist that have not been fully investigated.
Kimberly Salmi
Houghton
----------
Justice Center needs better spot
POSTED: September 29, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/511912.html?nav=5004
To the editor:
When will the committee start listening to the voters and start to realize that the citizens do not oppose the necessity of a new facility, only the location? Where is their compromise?
If you want the vote to pass, you need to select a location that the people are comfortable with. You do not build such a facility in the center of a tourist/college town just down the hill from the elementary school. The city and county of Houghton already transport detainees from the airport facility. They can figure out the transport from another facility. Houghton, choose another location.
Christine Houston
Houghton
----------
Wrong place to build new jail
When will the committee start listening to the voters and start to realize that the citizens do not oppose the necessity of a new facility, only the location? Where is their compromise?
If you want the vote to pass, you need to select a location that the people are comfortable with. You do not build such a facility in the center of a tourist/college town just down the hill from the elementary school. The city and county of Houghton already transport detainees from the airport facility. They can figure out the transport from another facility. Houghton, choose another location.
Christine Houston
Houghton
----------
Wrong place to build new jail
POSTED: September 29, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/511914.html?nav=5004
To the editor:
This letter is in response to Derek Poyhonen's letter of support for the Justice Center published Sept. 20.
First of all, let's call it what it is - a jail. I am not opposed to having a new facility, but I am opposed to its proposed location, now more than ever after reading Mr. Poyhonen's letter. Why would anyone support keeping a jail that houses "heroin addicts, attempted murders, felonius assaults, assaults with dangerour weapons, assaults on officers, rapists" in a residential neighborhood? Not only will I not support a new facility in central Houghton, I would like the current facility moved out of town.
I work with a lot of people who are considering relocating to this area. How does our town look when one of the most prominent buildings standing out on the hillside is a multi-storied jail? Will they still want to live in the mean streets of Houghton?
And let's consider property values in central Houghton. Currently there are three homes that face the jail. This number will increase to about 20 if a jail is built in the proposed spot east of the court house.
I believe the larger the jail, the larger the impacted area. Home values within a block or so will also drop because who wants neighbors like the kind described in Mr. Poyhonen's letter?
I know that he is in support of the proposed jail, but his letter spoke loudly and clearly to me. Please join me in voting no to the proposed jail (Justice Center).
Gretchen Janssen
Houghton
----------
Against the Justice Center
To the editor:
The Houghton County Justice Center Committee has done a good job of highlighting the need in Houghton County to improve the Jail, Sheriff's Office and District Court. While these facilities have served the county well for many years, I agree that they are outdated and too small.
I also recognize that Houghton County taxpayers have a responsibility to address these needs. While I appreciate the work done by this citizen committee to highlight this need, I respectfully disagree with their proposed solution.
They have proposed a 110-bed, $15 million project that, if approved by voters on Nov. 2, would be built in the center of Houghton.
I have three major objections to their proposal.
First, I believe the proposed jail is too large. An analysis of the combined jail and work release inmate population over the last 15 years would indicate that an 80-bed facility (combined jail and work release) would be adequate. One reason for building a jail larger than needed would be to rent beds to other counties to cover the increased operating costs of the new jail complex. Building a jail intended to also house inmates from outside Houghton County, in effect, makes it a regional jail. Asking Houghton County taxpayers to pay for a regional jail is not fair.
Secondly, I object to building a large jail complex in the center of Houghton. It is just poor urban planning to locate a large jail in a residential neighborhood next to downtown. The current jail is small and very low profile. The proposed jail would be a high profile, multistory complex occupying almost two city blocks. It will be visible from downtown Houghton and from across the canal in Hancock. It would be more appropriate to locate this type of large incarceration facility some place other than an urban core.
Thirdly, I believe it is the wrong time to be asking taxpayers for a tax increase. A recent Gazette poll asked readers if they would approve raising taxes to avoid laying off teachers. By an overwhelming majority, readers said, "No." I cannot believe that Houghton County voters would agree to raise taxes to build a new jail, but not to avoid laying off teachers.
I urge all Houghton County voters to vote "no" on the Justice Center bond proposal on Nov 2. Demand a better solution.
George Dewey
Houghton
This letter is in response to Derek Poyhonen's letter of support for the Justice Center published Sept. 20.
First of all, let's call it what it is - a jail. I am not opposed to having a new facility, but I am opposed to its proposed location, now more than ever after reading Mr. Poyhonen's letter. Why would anyone support keeping a jail that houses "heroin addicts, attempted murders, felonius assaults, assaults with dangerour weapons, assaults on officers, rapists" in a residential neighborhood? Not only will I not support a new facility in central Houghton, I would like the current facility moved out of town.
I work with a lot of people who are considering relocating to this area. How does our town look when one of the most prominent buildings standing out on the hillside is a multi-storied jail? Will they still want to live in the mean streets of Houghton?
And let's consider property values in central Houghton. Currently there are three homes that face the jail. This number will increase to about 20 if a jail is built in the proposed spot east of the court house.
I believe the larger the jail, the larger the impacted area. Home values within a block or so will also drop because who wants neighbors like the kind described in Mr. Poyhonen's letter?
I know that he is in support of the proposed jail, but his letter spoke loudly and clearly to me. Please join me in voting no to the proposed jail (Justice Center).
Gretchen Janssen
Houghton
----------
Against the Justice Center
POSTED: September 21, 2010
http://mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/511798.html?nav=5004
To the editor:The Houghton County Justice Center Committee has done a good job of highlighting the need in Houghton County to improve the Jail, Sheriff's Office and District Court. While these facilities have served the county well for many years, I agree that they are outdated and too small.
I also recognize that Houghton County taxpayers have a responsibility to address these needs. While I appreciate the work done by this citizen committee to highlight this need, I respectfully disagree with their proposed solution.
They have proposed a 110-bed, $15 million project that, if approved by voters on Nov. 2, would be built in the center of Houghton.
I have three major objections to their proposal.
First, I believe the proposed jail is too large. An analysis of the combined jail and work release inmate population over the last 15 years would indicate that an 80-bed facility (combined jail and work release) would be adequate. One reason for building a jail larger than needed would be to rent beds to other counties to cover the increased operating costs of the new jail complex. Building a jail intended to also house inmates from outside Houghton County, in effect, makes it a regional jail. Asking Houghton County taxpayers to pay for a regional jail is not fair.
Secondly, I object to building a large jail complex in the center of Houghton. It is just poor urban planning to locate a large jail in a residential neighborhood next to downtown. The current jail is small and very low profile. The proposed jail would be a high profile, multistory complex occupying almost two city blocks. It will be visible from downtown Houghton and from across the canal in Hancock. It would be more appropriate to locate this type of large incarceration facility some place other than an urban core.
Thirdly, I believe it is the wrong time to be asking taxpayers for a tax increase. A recent Gazette poll asked readers if they would approve raising taxes to avoid laying off teachers. By an overwhelming majority, readers said, "No." I cannot believe that Houghton County voters would agree to raise taxes to build a new jail, but not to avoid laying off teachers.
I urge all Houghton County voters to vote "no" on the Justice Center bond proposal on Nov 2. Demand a better solution.
George Dewey
Houghton
