Our response to the arguments opposing Whatcom County’s Prop 4

Rebutting the CON statement with a PRO point by point

CON: “Vote “No” on this re-packaged Jail Tax.”

PRO: In 2015 and 2017 voters rejected jail levies that did not provide for diversion and treatment measures. Since then, 16+ diversion and behavioral health facilities, programs, and services have been established. Meanwhile, a diverse, informed group of citizens, mental health professionals, first responders, and community leaders created a comprehensive roadmap for an innovative, right-sized, humane jail as just one facet of a balanced constellation of effective steps to address broad community needs. Does this really sound like re-packaging?

CON: “We rejected this new tax twice already for the same reasons: it’s too expensive…”

PRO: The cost estimate is $137 million for a 440-bed facility, which is 20% more capacity than is available today. However, the size has not yet been finalized. This is a responsible and realistic plan. As the cost and size are both estimates, the planners are using higher numbers in case the facility costs more than planned. A 440-bed facility is an estimate; and all involved hope this is sufficient, but if it isn’t, the plan will be able to adjust capacity. Notably, delays in construction result in increasing costs as the construction industry is experiencing cost growth in areas like concrete, lumber, steel, fuel, and labor.

CON: “…and the Ferndale location means higher transportation costs, increased climate impacts, and an inefficient justice system.”

PRO: To be clear, the LaBounty site is approximately 12-15 minutes from the County courthouse in downtown Bellingham by I-5. The Whatcom Transit Authority (WTA) has committed to expanding and updating its route network to accommodate an increase in traffic to and from the facility. The Sheriff's Department will change its current release policy to ensure that safe transportation options are available at the time of release. No one will be released and left to walk down the road in the middle of the night.

It’s difficult to counter speculative claims around transportation costs and climate impacts, but any increase in transportation costs would be outweighed by operational savings, ending wasteful spending on a building long past its useful life, and the risks associated with expensive liability lawsuits. As to climate impacts, the LaBounty site is more centrally located within the county than the current jail. It’s just as possible (yet speculative) that passenger trips will remain the same or decrease.

Con: Inefficient justice system

Pro: Both Eric Richey and Starck Follis have personally endorsed the plan. If prosecutors and public defenders can agree on this, it’s likely the great need for a new jail outweighs any speculated inefficiencies.

CON: “This year’s purposely vague proposal for a Ferndale jail is even larger than the ones we voted against twice.”

PRO: 521 beds were proposed in 2015, and 480 in 2017. There is currently no proposed bed size for a new facility. The County says size will be determined by a formula closer to the time of design and building, following standard pre-design and program planning work. A 440-bed size was used recently for a comparative cost estimate between three sites, but this still would not explain this inaccurate claim.

CON: “A 2017 report to the County Council said our jail population was too high because people sit in jail awaiting trial. Today, it’s even worse. People who can’t afford bail lose jobs and housing, leaving them homeless – a bigger jail won’t solve homelessness."

 PRO: Most people in our jail are awaiting trial, but each detainee was assessed by a judicial officer as a substantial risk to public safety if released. Pretrial circumstances are very different now than when the Vera Institute report was issued.

No one familiar with the issues of the criminal legal system and homelessness believes a County jail is meant to solve homelessness. To imply we shouldn’t invest in the jail because it doesn’t address the root causes of homelessness is like saying don’t build a hospital because it doesn’t address the root causes of health problems.

CON: “A rough estimate suggests $137 million+ for construction alone…”

PRO: To put things in perspective, maintaining the current jail costs taxpayers millions every year just to keep it in barest working condition. The current jail does not meet minimum standards. The hazards in the facility put the County at risk of lawsuits: a catastrophic event that causes loss of life or injury to inmates, staff, or visitors has a projected litigation payouts estimate of over $500 million -- four times the cost of the new jail. And resulting insurance rates into the foreseeable future would be astronomical. Whatcom County cannot continue to throw good money at a bad situation when it has the ability to provide a safe, human, modern facility to serve the people of Whatcom County.

CON: “… (not including increased operating costs)…”

PRO: Our current jail is notoriously inefficient to operate because of its outdated multistory configuration. A new, modern horizontal jail at LaBounty will be designed to operate safely, humanely, and more efficiently.

CON: “…and the County Treasurer has long-term fiscal concerns about overborrowing for a building at the expense of delivering services.”

PRO: Steve Oliver, the County Treasurer, personally supports the levy. He is rightly concerned about overborrowing because that would be illegal. Fortunately, the plan is to bring the bond down to under $100 million dollars through paying down the principal with the help of Whatcom county cities in the first four to six years.

CON: “We’re still paying a jail tax passed 19 years ago with little to show for it.”

PRO: The revenue from the 2004 public safety levy was used to build Whatcom’s Irongate Work Center, which is now at the end of its useful life. These funds have paid for jail maintenance and operations and other jail-related expenses.

CON: “Let’s reduce the need for jail beds instead of recklessly imposing a higher tax for an oversized jail.”

 PRO: Since 2015, Whatcom County created many diversion initiatives to minimize incarceration and lessen law enforcement’s involvement when possible. This includes setting up early assistance and intervention programs like GRACE, LEAD, and crisis response teams. The County built a crisis stabilization center for mental health and substance use disorder treatment, and supervised housing for Recovery Court participants. Courts use text reminders, electronic home monitoring, and alcohol detection bracelets to divert people from jail where appropriate. This important work will continue and be strengthened through the levy.

CON: “Twice our community has said to do the humane thing: fund services first. This proposal postpones services until 2030 to build an unaffordable mega-jail. Once again: “Vote No.”

PRO: Whatcom County has 16+ current programs and facilities in place, many since the 2017 levy. Whatcom County is dedicated to continuing funding and building out more behavioral health programs without any delay. Our state legislators have signed a letter in support of this levy saying they will work to procure state funds for behavioral health costs in Whatcom county.

This is a right-sized proposal for a humane jail and behavioral care center that can grow if, and when, necessary, without undue cost. That’s not a “mega-jail”.