Pueblo County Jail Task Force 2017 Comprehensive Report

PUEBLO COUNTY
JAIL TASK FORCE
COMPREHENSIVE REPORT
August 30, 2017

Jail Task Force Comprehensive Report prepared by
the office of Commissioner Garrison M. Ortiz and Administrator Rochelle Cruz,
in conjunction with staff from Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office, HOK,
Ehlers, Inc. and Pueblo County staff.
Table of Contents
Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Statutory Obligation ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Court Cases ................................................................................................................................................ 3
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4
Jail Task Force................................................................................................................................................ 6
Solutions ........................................................................................................................................................ 8
Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office .................................................................................................................... 10
Detention Center History & Mission ........................................................................................................... 10
Inmate Population....................................................................................................................................... 10
Inmate Classification-Risk Assessment .................................................................................................... 12
Detention Staff ........................................................................................................................................... 14
Overtime Costs ........................................................................................................................................ 15
Facility Conditions & Maintenance Costs.................................................................................................... 16
2015 Jail Tax ................................................................................................................................................ 18
Reilly Johnson Study ................................................................................................................................ 18
Process/Treatment Sub-Committee ........................................................................................................... 19
National & Pueblo County Statistics ........................................................................................................ 19
Alternatives to Incarceration ...................................................................................................................... 20
Work Release Program ............................................................................................................................ 20
Pueblo County Pre-Trial Services Program .............................................................................................. 21
Vivitrol Program ....................................................................................................................................... 21
Treatment Center ........................................................................................................................................ 22
Short-Term Solutions .................................................................................................................................. 26
Option 1 ................................................................................................................................................... 27
Options 2 & 3 ........................................................................................................................................... 28
Option 4 ................................................................................................................................................... 29
Considerations for a New Jail ...................................................................................................................... 30
Ehlers........................................................................................................................................................ 30
Staff/Transportation Study ...................................................................................................................... 31
Inmate Projection Study .......................................................................................................................... 32
HOK .......................................................................................................................................................... 33
Building and Site Selection Sub-Committees ........................................................................................... 35
Long-Term Solutions ................................................................................................................................... 36
Option 1 ................................................................................................................................................... 37
Option 2 ................................................................................................................................................... 38
Option 3 ................................................................................................................................................... 39
Option 4 ................................................................................................................................................... 40
Option 5 ................................................................................................................................................... 41
Option 6 ................................................................................................................................................... 42
Financing a New Jail .................................................................................................................................... 46
Revenue Bond ........................................................................................................................................ 46
General Obligation Bond ........................................................................................................................ 46
Sales and Use Tax Revenue Bonds ......................................................................................................... 47
Task Force Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 49
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 50
PREFACE
This comprehensive report is the ultimate deliverable of the Pueblo County Jail Task Force. This report
provides an overview of the issues studied throughout a 5-month period and the conclusions drawn. This
report was written to provide justification for the recommendation of the Jail Task Force. For community
projects or issues, like the Pueblo County jail, we feel that it is best practice to provide full disclosure of the
analysis that goes into making public policy decisions such as these.
The overall structure of the report begins with some historical information on the Pueblo County Detention
Facility and some of the ongoing issues at the jail throughout the past several years. It then provides insight
into the structure of the Jail Task Force and the short and long-term solutions that were studied. The report
closes in providing political information pertaining to a possible ballot initiative to construct a new jail. The
report also discusses the scope of work for design firm HOK that will continue post-delivery of this report to
complete a Jail and Detention Center Master Plan.
Thank you to all members of the Pueblo County Jail Task Force for their commitment to this endeavor,
especially to the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office for their hard work and openness in providing much
operational information. Please know that this project was launched and conducted based in the spirit of
what we, the Task Force, felt was the most beneficial course of action for the community now and in years
to come.
(Note - Letter of support for the proposed Treatment Center can be found in the Appendix)
Task Force Members

Betty Nufer,
Garrison Ortiz, Mike Cafasso,
Pueblo Pro Bono Program
Pueblo County Commissioner VP, St. Mary Corwin Medical Center
Manager/Metro Volunteers
Kirk Taylor, Brian Gomez, Charlene Graham,
Pueblo County Sheriff Community Corrections Director Former Bureau Chief
Ray Aguilera, Rochelle Cruz, Jerry Pacheco,
Pueblo City Council BOCC Administrator Pueblo Urban Renewal Authority
J.R. Hall,
Ed Brown, Judy Parry,
Undersheriff-Pueblo County Sheriff’s
Pueblo City Council City of Pueblo
Office
Chris Nicoll, Deb Hinsvark, Ed Perry,
Pueblo City Council Municipal Advisor Licensed Realtor
Jeff Chostner, John Klomp, Emily Price,
District Attorney-10th Judicial District Former County Commissioner Community Member
Troy Davenport, Rich Lane, Keith Swerdfeger,
Interim Pueblo Police Chief Small Business Owner Chairman, K.R. Swerdfeger
Judy Leonard, Mark Mears, Sean Tapia,
Pueblo West Metro District Bureau Chief Facilities Director
Darlene Alcala, Cynthia Mitchell, Jeff Teschner,
Former Warden, Pueblo County Jail Pueblo County Assistant Attorney Warden of the Jail
Sharon Bonner, Donald Moore, Aimee Tihonovich,
Community Member CEO-Pueblo Community Health Center Budget and Finance Director
Jamie Burt, Dr. Michael Nerenberg, Ken West,
SVP, Sunflower Bank Doctor of Medicine President, H.W. Construction
1|Page
STATUTORY OBLIGATION
Liability to Pueblo County
Operating the county jail presents one of the greatest, if not the greatest, risk of liability to Pueblo County
government.
By law, Pueblo County and the Pueblo County Sheriff are tasked with providing a county jail that meets
certain minimum conditions. Colorado Revised Statute (C.R.S) §17-26-101 states, “There shall be maintained
in each county in this state, at the expense of the county, a county jail for the detention, safekeeping, and
confinement of persons and prisoners lawfully committed.” Furthermore, C.R.S. §17-26-102 dictates the
responsibilities of the sheriff in relation to the operation of the county jail. It states, “The Sheriff of the
County, in person or by deputy appointed for that purpose, shall be the keeper of the county jail. He/She
shall be responsible for the manner in which the same is kept. He/She shall see that the same is kept clean,
safe, and wholesome. The expenses of keeping the jail in good order and of repair and of lighting and
warming that part wherein prisoners are confined and the office in the jail shall be paid by the county
wherein the jail is situated.”
Courts have long established that inmates are guaranteed the protections of the United States Constitution
while incarcerated. (“Prison walls do not form a barrier separating prison inmates from the protections of
the constitution.”) Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987). Federal law permits individuals to hold government
employees, and in some cases, their employers accountable for violation of rights secured by the United
States Constitution. 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 reads as follows: “Every person who, under color of any statute,
ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any state or territory, subjects, or causes to be subject any citizen
of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights,
privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an
action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.” The constitutional rights generally
claimed to be violated in the context of jail litigation pursued under 42 U.S.C. §1983 are the First, Fourth,
Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Courts have often determined that overcrowding is the cause of many constitutional problems including:
increased incidents of inmate attacks on other inmates and staff; riots; the spread of communicable disease;
increased incidents of use of force by deputies upon inmates; suicide; exposure to environmental
hazards/fire hazards; and increased incidents of sexual violence.
A county’s exposure to liability may increase when its detention facility is breaking down and overcrowded.
In addition to the toll current jail conditions impose on inmates and staff, continued deterioration can result
in more consequences if measures are not taken to address the situation. Multi-million dollar verdicts are
not uncommon in litigation stemming from insufficient jail facilities, and courts often exercise their
powers of oversight granted in the constitution which may include a mandate to remedy any unsafe jail
conditions.
(Prepared by the Pueblo County Attorney’s Office)
If Pueblo County was forced to build a new jail because of federal mandate or due to the outcome of a
litigation, page 45 of this report outlines the County services that would have to be cut to pay for this.
2|Page
Court Cases
Multiple lawsuits concerning conditions in state prisons and county jails have gone to trial, some have been
adjudicated and many more are currently being litigated, with shattering results to the finances and budgets
of states and counties across the country. Some examples of these costly and mandatory court orders
include:
ACLU of Nebraska files lawsuit over state prisons overcrowding, says conditions violate inmates’ rights
By Paul Hammel / World-Herald Bureau, Aug 16, 2017
The lawsuit seeks class-action status and asks for a court order to require state officials to fix prison
problems. The prison has reached a state of chaos that daily endangers the health, safety and lives of
Prisoners and staff. "Extreme" prison overcrowding in the state's system are causing unsafe conditions for
staff and "needless death and suffering" for inmates.
Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts stated of the lawsuit, “This lawsuit by ACLU, requesting that we release
dangerous prisoners, endangers the public safety and endangers our corrections officers.” Nebraska prison
is operating at 159% over capacity.
Note: The Pueblo County Jail is currently operating at an approximately 152% over
capacity, with a design capacity of 509 beds and a population of about 777.
Lawsuit Challenges Appalling Conditions at Suffolk County (NY) Jails

By NYCLU April 5, 2012
“The overcrowded and inhumane conditions at the jails are the product of decades of neglect and
indifference by county officials,” NYCLU Senior Staff said. Suffolk County spent $9 million of taxpayer money
to house prisoners in jails outside of the County and budgeted $1.5 million annually to continue doing so…
Note: Reference on-going operational costs of running Short-Term Solutions 2 & 3 on page 29.
LAWSUITS AGAINST JAILS, SHERIFFS AND STATE HOSPITAL HAVE COST TAXPAYERS MORE THAN $38.6
MILLION
By Sarah Kleiner and K. Burnell Evans Richmond Times-Dispatch, Dec 18, 2016 (Richmond, Virginia)
“Damages awarded in suits against Loudon County Jail have exceeded $115 million.”
“Richmond Sheriff C. T. Woody says ‘The taxpayers are being robbed. We could have used all the litigation
and settlement money—millions of dollars—to build a new facility already.”
“The State of Virginia has spent more than $38.6 million defending and settling claims against jails and
sheriffs’ departments in the last five years.”
BALTIMORE (MD) JAIL SETTLEMENT TO BRING MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS IN MEDICAL CARE, FACILITIES
By Charles Wagner
The Baltimore Jail Class Action Lawsuit is Jerome Duvall, et al. v. Lawrence J. Hogan, et al., Case No. 1:94-
CV-02541-ELH, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Defendants shall pay Plaintiffs $450,000 in full and final satisfaction of all claims of Plaintiffs for attorney’s
fees and costs in connection with this action prior to the Effective Date.
3|Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Pueblo County Jail Task Force (JTF) was formed in March 2017 by Pueblo County Commissioner Garrison
Ortiz in response to several tours, reports, incidents, and growing community concerns surrounding the
Pueblo County Jail. Numerous tours of the jail by Commissioner Ortiz revealed, firsthand, the failing
infrastructure and poor living and working conditions for both inmates and detention deputies.
Reports provided to the Commissioner included an Operational Assessment of the jail conducted by the
National Institute of Corrections (NIC) (Available upon Request), dated February 2015, which thoroughly
detailed the current conditions of the jail and recommendations for improvement. A prevalent theme of
the report included a need for additional space to reasonably accommodate the current inmate population
and the need to replace aging infrastructure. One particular recommendation in the report sites, “The main
facility, the Tower, is said to need nearly $4 million in renovation simply to keep it running. Our general
observations support this finding. This must be the focus of a Sheriff’s Office Master Plan for the jail and its
ancillary services. (The failure of this facility to function would create a dire situation in the way of adverse
safety and security issues for the community. This appears to be one of those items in which it can be said
“pay me now or pay me much more later”.)
In addition, an incident occurring on March 3, 2017 at the current detention center, resulted in a brazen
attack in which three deputies were injured. During the attack, a deputy was disarmed of his Taser by an
inmate who then used the Taser on another deputy to attempt an escape. (See Appendix for April 12 News
Release_Inmate Attack) As Pueblo County Sheriff Kirk M. Taylor stated, “These attacks are just the tip of
the iceberg of what’s to come if we don’t figure out a way to get some relief in the jail with regard to
overcrowding. At some point the bough will break and we’re very close to reaching that point.”
Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the commissioners of each county in Colorado to own and maintain
their respective county jail – Colorado Revised Statutes:
§ 17-26-126. Commissioners to examine jail
It is the duty of the board of county commissioners, as often as they deem necessary, but at least
once annually, to make personal examination of the jail of its county, its sufficiency, and the
management thereof and to correct all irregularities and improprieties therein found.
§ 30-11-104. County Buildings--acquisition of land or buildings by eminent domain authorized

(1)(a) Each county, at its own expense, shall provide a suitable courthouse, a sufficient jail, and other
necessary county buildings and keep them in repair.
It has been well documented and known in the community that the overcrowding and other issues at the
Pueblo County Jail have long needed to be addressed. Commissioner Ortiz felt given the magnitude of the
situation, the current and future needs of the jail would be best studied through the formation of a task
force comprised of experts in respective fields.
The first meeting of the Pueblo County Jail Task Force was held March 17, 2017. At that meeting,
committees and guidelines were established so that task force members could study numerous aspects
surrounding Pueblo County’s detention facility.
4|Page
Over the course of the past five months, sub-committee members have done an intense study on the
following:
 Costs of the current facility, to include on-going maintenance and future capital costs
 Use of existing off-site buildings to augment current capacity
 Increased average daily population (ADP) in the jail
 Recidivism prevention measures
 Alternatives to incarceration
 Construction of a new jail
 Complete renovation of existing jail
 Overall public safety
It is through the rigorous study of these topics; the task force has rendered the following recommendation:
Pueblo County, and the community overall, will be best served from a financial and
safety perspective, in constructing a new jail that will be built to properly
accommodate the current average daily population of today and for decades to
come. Pueblo County should exercise all available financial resources to construct a
new jail and to refurbish the existing jail dormitory to become a detox and treatment
center for the community. Given the costs of possible litigation, human lives, rising
construction costs, urgent safety concerns, and the need for detox and treatment in
our community, the Jail Task Force recommends that both components (a new jail
and detox/treatment center) be acted upon as soon as possible.
5|Page
JAIL TASK FORCE
The Pueblo County Jail Task Force was formed in March 2017 by Pueblo County Commissioner Garrison Ortiz
in response to several tours, reports, incidents, and growing community concerns surrounding the Pueblo
County Jail. Several tours of the jail by Commissioner Ortiz revealed, firsthand, the failing infrastructure and
poor living and working conditions for both inmates and detention deputies.
It has been well documented and known in the community that the overcrowding and other issues at the
Pueblo County Jail have long needed to be addressed. Commissioner Ortiz felt given the magnitude of the
situation, the current and future needs of the jail would be best studied through the formation of a task
force comprised of experts in respective fields. At the meeting, committees and guidelines were established
so that task force members could study numerous aspects surrounding Pueblo County’s detention facility.
To fully evaluate all possible solutions, the 40+ member task force was broken into several sub-committees.
“The mission of the Pueblo County Jail Task Force (JTF) is to evaluate and recommend a short
and long-term solution to address the ever-growing concerns of the Pueblo County Jail.”
Jail Task Force Sub-Committees

To fully evaluate all possible solutions, the 40+ member task force was broken into seven sub-committees.
Law Enforcement Finance
The law enforcement sub-committee is The finance sub-committee is charged with
comprised of personnel from the Pueblo County analyzing all true and opportunity costs to be
Sheriff’s Office. These are the subject matter weighed with each short and long-term option
experts that have provided firsthand, statistics proposed. This sub-committee’s primary goal
and information pertaining to the current and is to nail down one-time and ongoing costs
historical operations of the jail. associated with each option.
Building Legal
The building sub-committee is tasked with The legal sub-committee is made up of the
evaluating all buildings that could be used to County Attorney’s Office and is responsible for
augment the capacity of the existing jail on a vetting each proposed option from a legal
short-term basis and provide estimates for perspective and keeping the task force
bringing these buildings up to code. The informed on what possible risks could be
building subcommittee also provides guidance associated with each course of action.
to design considerations of building a new jail.
6|Page
Process/Treatment
The process/treatment sub-committee was formed
to diagram and assess the local justice “system” from
time of law enforcement contact to the time a
judgement is ultimately rendered. Upon diagraming
the process, the sub-committee has been charged
with developing potential solutions to help mitigate
the constant churning of reoccurring offenders
through the local justice system and jail. The sub-
committee is comprised of community members,
clinicians, and persons who hold the understanding
that resources not only need to be committed to the
jail, but also to the front-end of the problem on how
to stop citizens from going to jail to begin with and
treat, rather than incarcerate, people who are
desperately trying to break the cycle of addiction.
Political
The political sub-committee has community
members who hold a strong pulse on local politics
and how each possible option could play out
politically in the community. The political sub-
committee is also responsible for keeping abreast
of what the true “needs” of the community are and
how each proposed solution addresses those
community needs.
Building Site Selection

The work of the building site selection sub-
committee is to gather and provide information
pertaining to possible sites for building a new jail.
This sub-committee includes individuals from
Pueblo County’s GIS and Facilities departments.
7|Page
SOLUTIONS
Throughout the course of this study, the Jail Task Force has studied several short and long-term solutions
to address the current needs of the jail. The short-term options are structures that can provide immediate
relief; whereas the long-term options are just that – solutions aimed at solving the current aging and over-
crowded facility.
Short-Term Solutions
1. CMHIP Building 020 (Old Forensics Building)
2. Centennial South Penitentiary II
3. Huerfano County Correctional Center
4. Other CMHIP buildings
Long-Term Solutions
1. Complete overhaul of existing facility
2. New jail behind Dennis Maes Judicial
Building
3. New jail at remote location
4. Phased approach
5. PuebloPlex
6. County financing
8|Page
9|Page
PUEBLO COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE
Pueblo County Sheriff, Kirk M. Taylor, and staff of the Sheriff’s Office are responsible for law enforcement
services, jail operation, civil processes, search/rescue and fire protection for over 2,300 square miles of
unincorporated area. The office is divided into three bureaus — Law Enforcement, Detention, and
Emergency Services, with approximately 300 employees overall. The focus of this report is the detention
facility.
Detention Center “Jail” History

The Detention Center is located in
downtown Pueblo, and consists of two main
housing areas, “The Tower” and “The
Dorms”. The Tower was opened in October
1980, with a design capacity of 189 and a life
span of 25-30 years. “The Dorms”, originally
built as a minimum, direct-supervision
dormitory style facility, were opened in
September 2006, having a design capacity of
320. Between the two housing areas is
where a “design” capacity of 509 inmates is
derived.
PCSO Detention Facility Mission

The mission of the Pueblo County Detention Facility is:
“To provide community safety through a secure, constitutional detention facility. To accomplish
the mission, we strive to maintain a safe, clean and secure environment for those incarcerated as
well as our staff. The men and women of this office go beyond traditional custodial care. We
provide opportunities in education, health and personal development to help the offender be
successful when he or she returns to our community. We are committed to managing our clients
in a professional manner, treating all with dignity and respecting their constitutional rights.”
Inmate Population
As stated, the design capacity of the jail is 509 inmates; however, the average daily population (ADP) of the
facility in the first six months of 2017 is 777 inmates, with a highpoint this summer predicted to reach 825-
850 inmates. Since 2007, Pueblo County’s population and jail booking numbers have remained static, but
with an increase in arrest charges, changes to state law, longer length of stays, as well as an increase in
prosecuted cases, inmates in the facility have hit record highs. In 2010, finalized changes in over 50
legislative actions funneled Colorado prison populations into county jails, starting the upward trend. Adding
to the already growing numbers, changes in pre-trial services in 2014 have led toward a more felony based
jail. Felony crimes carry an average length of stay that can be 2-3 times higher than a misdemeanor offense.
As illustrated in the chart on the next page, there is a vast disconnect between the number of inmates the
county jail is designed to hold, and the number of inmates throughout the years it has held.
10 | P a g e
Population
800
700
600
500 ___ Design

Capacity 509
400
Population
300
200
100
0
8/11/17
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 ANR
Note: According to the NIC, county jails run most efficiently when running at 80% of capacity.
% OVER CAPACITY
Population
160% ___ Design

Capacity 509
140%
120%
Inmate Population
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
11 | P a g e
Inmate Classification and Risk Score Assessment
At the time of admission into jail, the inmate’s security risk is assessed using the Highpointe Classification
Matrix, adapted by the office in 2008. This objective jail classification system assigns a risk score between
1 (highest risk score) through 8 (lowest risk score). Variables considered in determining an inmates’ risk
score include seriousness of current criminal charge and institutional behavior, both past and present.
The Highpointe Matrix is the primary indicator used to determine an inmates housing location. An inmate’s
classification and risk score is consistently evaluated throughout their incarceration and is influenced by
positive and negative behaviors displayed by the inmate, enabling jail staff to identify and separate
predators from potential victims. A critical component to efficient and effective inmate housing is the jail
housing space availability within the facility.
An evaluation of classification risk scores between the years 2012 through 2017 identify an increasing trend
in the most serious risk score classifications, 1 through 3, and a static or decreasing trend in medium to low
risk score classifications, 4 through 8. The current jail is not designed to properly house the amount of
high risk offenders incarcerated; rather, the largest inmate house area (Dormitory) was designed to house
medium and low risk offenders. This dynamic results in numerous housing challenges which have a
negative impact on inmate and staff safety and security.
This likely is the result of alternatives to incarceration and functional pre-trial services programs. The local
criminal justice community supports pre-trial services programs which are designed to incarcerate high risk
offenders, and release into the community, low risk offenders. In the absence of a local pre-trial services
program, the average daily jail population would be higher than current levels.
Consequences of Overcrowding
Aside from exceeding the design capacity, both The Tower and Dorms were never designed to house high
level offenders; rather the original designs were a pre-trial holding facility and minimum security facility.
There are minimal areas for special populations or circumstances, i.e., mental health, drug withdrawal,
gangs, youth special offenders, elderly, females, sexual orientation, racial conflict, infirm, co-defendants,
and low-level offenders.
Basic needs of the inmates are difficult to meet. There is a shortage of clothing, personal space, and sleeping
areas. Adjustments have been made through creative means. Most areas of the jail are being triple-bunked.
Many cells have "boat beds" -- mattresses that sit on top of a plastic frame that resembles a raft -- on the
floor next to the cell's two bunks.
In an April 12, 2017 article in The Pueblo Chieftain, Pueblo County Sheriff, Kirk M. Taylor, stated, “The biggest
concern we have is when you get an overpopulated jail, you decrease the places within the facility that you
can separate people for their safety and staff safety…" Taylor said. "When you triple-bunk in a cell that is
designed to hold one prisoner and triple-bunk in the maximum-security area, you're asking for problems."
(See Appendix for April 12 news article)
12 | P a g e
Highpointe Classification Matrix
The classification matrix is used by the Sheriff’s Office to determine an inmate’s housing location in
the jail. The class matrix ranks inmates on a scale of 1 to 8. From 2012 through 2017, the jail has
seen an increasing trend in the most serious risk score classifications, 1 through 3, and a static or
decreasing trend in medium to low risk score classifications, 4 through 8. This increase is partially
due to the implementation of Pre-Trial Services Program in 2015
13 | P a g e
Detention Center Staff
Staffing is usually the most expensive and the most important aspect of any secured setting. Staffing is a
simple formula when it comes to posts. A post is a mandated area where a deputy or a civilian employee
must be present. A post in the jail is the same as a post in prison or other detention facility; it must be
covered. When that post is not staffed, negative situations can occur. It must be covered with a person
and that person must be prepared to act. To determine how many staff are need at each post, count the
number of posts that are needed, multiply the post by the number of shifts, and by a shift relief factor of
1.4 to 1.6, depending on factors such as seniority, vacation leave, sick leave, Family Medical Leave Act, or
workman’s compensation circumstances.
Currently there are 18 mandated posts for deputies in the jail. There are also three civilian posts
for master control and dorm control. To determine the number of personnel needed at each
post, one would multiply the number of posts (18) by 3 shifts (7am, 3pm and 11pm), and by a
shift relief factor of 1.6, which equals 4.8; or 4.8 persons are needed for each post. Eighteen
multiplied by 4.8 equals 86.4 deputies needed to run efficiently with the least amount of
overtime.
In 2005, the Tower had 17 mandated deputy posts. In 2009 a “watcher” program made a mandatory post
for all level one suicide watches after an inmate committed suicide. This intensified after 2010 because
more level one suicide watches meant more overtime sensitive “watcher” posts. To maintain safety and
security for this special needs population, the mandated post allocation was increased by one for a total of
18 mandated deputy posts. Since 2009 to present, no male or female inmate who have been identified as
a level one suicide risk have been successful in taking their own life. The addition of this mandated deputy
post is necessary and effective.
When Sheriff Taylor took office in 2007, overtime totaled 21,121 hours. This was attributed to “10-hour
shifts” for deputies. From 2008 to 2012, overtime was held down to under 10,000 hours, with overtime in
2010 down to an all-time low. In 2012, overcrowding required more deputies to make the jail safer.
Command assigned more detention specialists to Dormitory Control and Master Control. This reallocation
of civilian personnel allowed for deputies who were previously assigned to these control rooms to be
reassigned to the inmate housing units under a plan the Sheriff introduced to cut costs and enhance safety
and security.
Unfortunately, by June 2017 of this year, 32 deputies had left the Sheriff’s Office due to resignations,
promotions, retirements, transfers, and terminations; roughly 6 deputies a month leave. Along with the
current number of mandated posts, coupled with the overcrowding, forced overtime, 12-hour shifts, and
other remedies have been the result because the mandated posts MUST be filled. According to Undersheriff
J.R. Hall, “We are required to do our job and protect the citizens, while at the same time the United States
Constitution requires us to protect inmates from each other and others who want to harm or neglect them.”
14 | P a g e
Overtime Costs
The cost of caring for an inmate is nationally recognized at $70.00 a day. Using a conservative value of
$50.00 a day and budget of $14m to run the jail, combined with 200 more inmates a year, simple math
would put the Sheriff’s budget at $3,650,000 more a more. The simple math equation is no match for the
efficiency and calculated effort of the Sheriff. Budget overruns associated with overtime necessary to
operate a safe and secure jail facility make it extremely challenging to manage - more inmates cost MORE,
NOT less.
20,797 hours of overtime equals roughly $718,000.00 (average overtime of $34.57 an hour used) – with an
approved budget of $100,000 Refer to above graph.
A more efficient jail can hold more prisoners more effectively and there are many factors that are
exacerbated by a high-rise tower. The dormitory was built as a minimum-security facility, but now
predominantly holds a felony level population. The current risk levels that are housed in the dorm adds to
the complicated staffing issues.
PCSO Detention Overtime Hours History

$25,000
$20,000
$15,000
Overtime Hours
$10,000
$132,214.00
$730,161.61
$730,230.75
$718,952.29
$603,464.29
$265,096.26
$468,293.86
$685,366.84
$284,096.26
$288,901.49
$205,734.71
$5,000
$0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 8/11/17
(2017 Average OT Wage for Detention Deputy - $34.57) YTD July ANR
15 | P a g e
FACILITY CONDITIONS
Not only have the living and working conditions for inmates and deputies worsened, but the circumstances
for maintenance workers from the County’s Facilities Department have also toughened. Work orders from
January to Mid-August 2017 alone, total 1303, averaging 8 requests a day.
CUSTOMER SERVICE REQUESTS (WORK ORDERS)

Month Number of Requests
January 221
February 137
Unbudgeted Capital Projects
March 197
April 153 The accelerated deterioration of the Pueblo
May 106 County Jail due to overcrowding has
June 205 historically resulted in several unbudgeted
capital projects.
July 173
August 111 Several of these unbudgeted capital projects
have historically gone significantly over
budget. Due to strict federal guidelines and
attempting to retrofit repairs into an aging jail,
2017 these unforeseen costs have saddled Pueblo
Quarter 1 Maintenance Requests County with tremendous financial burdens
throughout the years. Furthermore, many of
 Missing Screws these project requests are not always a
 Water Pressure consideration, but at times a must as law and
 Sewer Back-up order must be maintained at all times.
 Broken Elevators
 Broken Fire Water Main (See Appendix for staff letter dated August 18,
 Loose Door Frames 2017)
 Clogged Showers
 Leaking Ceiling
 Missing Caulking
 Broken faucets/sinks
 Temperature Control issues
 Broken Windows
 Broken Locks
 Broken Lights
 Damaged Fixtures
 Leaking Toilets
 Loose Tables
 Non-working Phones
 Damaged Tray Slots
 Sticking Locks
 Laundry Machine Failures
 Leaking Pipes
16 | P a g e
The annual maintenance and repair costs of the aging facility fluctuate in accordance to the needs of the
jail. Based on historical trends and anticipated needs of the jail, the total salary and repair costs from 2014
– 2024, is estimated to exceed 14 million dollars.
2014 $849,724 2019 (Estimate) $1,700,304

 Salary Allocation: $550,924  Salary Allocation: $806,527
 Material Allocation: $113,219  Material Allocation: $186,437
 Capital Projects Requested: $100,000  Capital Projects Requests: $707,340
 Capital Projects Completed: $185,580.52 2020 (Estimate) $1,413,861
2015 $748,383  Salary Allocation: $838,789
 Salary Allocation: $596,810  Material Allocation: $201,352
 Materials Allocation $136,573  Capital Projects Requests: $373,720
 Capital Projects Requested: $226,000 2021 (Estimate) $1,182,197
 Capitals Projects Completed: $ 15,000  Salary Allocation: $872,340
(Fire Alarm Upgrade on-hold)  Material Allocation: $217,460
2016 $949,528  Capital Projects Requests: $92,397
 Salary Allocation: $717,000 2022 (Estimate) $1,183,700
 Material Allocation: $148,000  Salary Allocation: $907,234
 Capital Projects Requested: $ 45,000  Material Allocation: $234,857
 Capital Projects Completed: $ 84,528.07  Capital Projects Requests: $41,609
2017 (Estimate) $1,896,761 2023 (Estimate) $1,240,026
 Capital Projects Requests: $991,241  Capital Projects Requests: $42,857
2018 (Estimate) $1,914,103 2024 (Estimate) $1,599,345
 Capital Projects Requests: $965,969  Capital Projects Requests: $344,143
Totals from 2014 – 2024 (Estimate) $14,677,932

 Salary Allocation: $ 8,735,598
 Material Allocation: $ 2,097,949
 Capital Projects: $ 3,844,385
Crumbling Walls Cracked Pipes Exterior Cracks
(Statistics provided by Pueblo County Facilities Department)
17 | P a g e
2015 Jail Tax
Ballot issue 1A, also known as the “Jail Tax”, was a sales and use tax increase that was run in November of
2015. This ballot issue, if passed, would create a funding source for building a new county jail, generate
additional revenue to cover personnel costs for the Sheriff’s Office, and purchase law enforcement related
equipment. The ballot issue stipulated that the County’s sales and use tax rate be increased by one cent
($0.01) per dollar to generate an estimated $18,000,000 per year for a term of 10 years.
Also, included in the ballot issue were plans to utilize some of the funding generated from the tax increase
for re-purposing the existing dormitories at the jail for a social detoxification center where city or “fresh
arrests” could be housed. The ballot issue also stated that the dormitories would be repurposed to bring
back work release and inmate labor programs that were cut in the past. (See Appendix for Ballot Language
and Election Results)
The voting results on ballot issue 1A in the November 2015 election was 16,238 or 43.41% of total votes
cast in favor of the tax increase, with 21,165 or 56.59% of total votes cast in opposition to the tax increase.
There were 1,303 under votes. (See Official Election Results in the Appendix).
While there are many political factors that may have contributed to the defeat of the “Jail Tax”, such as
other ballot measures run during that time, it was widely regarded that the personnel and equipment
components of the ballot initiative were an immense drag on 1A’s passage in 2015. If another ballot
measure for the jail were to be proposed, it is understood that personnel costs and equipment should be
left out of the ballot measure and that a potential ballot measure should be focused on two key
components: 1) Building a new jail to meet current and future capacity needs. 2) Repurposing the existing
dormitories at the jail to become a long-term detox and treatment center accessible to the community.
Focusing on these two elements alone, helps trim out $40m alone from the “Jail Tax” run in 2015.
Reilly Johnson Architecture

In preparation for the “Jail Tax” initiative that was run in the fall of 2015,
a study was conducted free of charge by architect and engineering firm
Reilly Johnson in June of 2015. The study proposed three different
configurations and associated costs for building a new jail behind the
Dennis Maes Judicial Building. Out of the site plans proposed by Reilly
Johnson, the Sheriff’s Department promoted the concept design for a 932-
bed detention facility at a projected cost of $140,308,900. The housing
design for the scenario included 3 Trusty Dormitories with 64 beds each,
6 Single-bunked cell houses at 24 beds each, and 12 Double-bunked cell
houses at 48 beds each. Room for a 20-bed Infirmary was also included in
the layout. (See Appendix 2015 Reilly Johnson Study)
Being that the site plan by Reilly Johnson was for building a vertical/linear
jail that was approximately 60ft. tall or four stories in height, and that the
cost estimates from the study were only valid until the 2nd quarter of 2017,
a significant need was identified for a professional study to be conducted
on the construction of a new jail.
18 | P a g e
PROCESS/TREATMENT SUB-COMMITTEE
The process/treatment sub-committee was formed to diagram and assess the local justice “system” from
time of law enforcement contact to the time a judgement is ultimately rendered. The goal of this sub-
committee was to thoroughly understand and improve societal re-entry success, thereby ultimately
reducing recidivism and ultimately operational costs of the jail. Throughout the course of the study, the
sub-committee developed potential solutions to help mitigate the constant churning of reoccurring
offenders through the local justice system and jail. See chart below.
In mapping out the process, it was apparent of the high number of recurring Drug Felony 4 charges. A recent
report on the heroin epidemic in Pueblo County stated, “Pueblo County had the highest age-adjusted rate
of heroin-related overdoses in 2013-2015, which was over three times the state rate.” (See Appendix for
Analysis of the Heroin Epidemic in Pueblo County.)
National & Pueblo County Jail Statistics

 County jails have become the largest providers of mental health services in the United States, and
they are not designed, set up, nor trained to handle these issues long term
 Serious mental illness in jails is 3 to 6 times higher than for the general population
 Almost 30% of people who are chronically homeless have mental health conditions and half of
those also have co-occurring substance abuse disorders - in comparison only 6% of Americans
have a severe mental health disorder
 Of the 744 inmates in the Pueblo County Jail on July 12 of this year, 474 (64%) had special
circumstances:
- 236 on heroin - 10 methamphetamines
- 37 on opiate pills - 105 mental illness
- 66 alcohol related - 20 suicide prevention watch
 In a study of 330 opiate arrests in Pueblo County, 74% committed theft and 70 % were recidivists
(See Appendix for Crime/Cost Heroin Report)
19 | P a g e
Alternatives to Incarceration
Work Release Program
The Inmate Labor Program is designed to assist non-profit agencies in the Pueblo community with various
projects many non-profit agencies could not afford to have completed with the funds in their budgets. The
crew of 6-8 approved trustees spend many hours assisting non-profit agencies, as well as cleaning and
beautifying various areas of Pueblo County.
Because of the closing of work release in 2015; subsequent reassignments of deputies and the reduction in
sentenced inmates, the labor program now only has one work crew for county projects and one work crew
to help with community projects for non-profit agencies. Due to the reduction of work crews the assistance
to many non-profit agencies as well as projects in the community have been significantly reduced or
eliminated. Below is statistical data for the Inmate Labor Program for the past three years. The chart below
depicts the total number of hours the labor crew worked and the conversion of the hours worked into the
number of dollars it would have cost if the work performed required payment.
Inmate Labor
$341,528
350000
300000
250000
$81,719 $39,702
200000
150000
42,684
100000 9,931 4,824 Dollars
50000
Hours
0
2014 2015 2016
Hours Dollars
Sheriff Taylor hopes in the near future the labor program can be built upon to provide the much needed
assistance to non-profit agencies within the Pueblo community. Until the labor program can become the
vibrant program it once was, the assistance provided to the community by the labor crew will be carefully
scheduled to ensure the proper projects and agencies are receiving the assistance they need such as non-
profit agencies, City and County governments and local churches.
If a new county jail were to be constructed, the Work

Release Program would be able to be re-opened and
enhanced.
20 | P a g e
Pueblo County Pre-Trial Services Program
A Pre-Trial In-Home Detention Program operates under C.R.S. § 16-4-106 to establish a program for
defendants incarcerated after their arrest in order to determine eligibility for release from jail on bond plus
provide recommendations to the court regarding bond setting. The Pre-Trial In-Home Detention Program
supervises pre-trial defendants utilizing a variety of supervision tools including, drug and alcohol testing,
electronic monitoring, and day reporting.
Pursuant to CRS § 16-4-106(3) Pueblo County’s Pre-Trial Services Program has been formulated by a
community advisory board created for such purposes and approved by the chief judge of the judicial district.
The current plan is summarized below subject to change as determined by the community advisory board
and approved by the chief judge of the judicial district. The program gathers pertinent information that the
judge is required by statute to consider in making a pre-trial release decision based on the following
evidenced-based principals: decisions regarding bond and release should be made by a judge or magistrate
and informed by an empirical risk assessment, the bond guidelines, input from relevant attorney’s and
Judge’s input; higher supervision services should be given to high risk defendants and lower risk defendants
should receive lower supervision or no supervision at all; and higher risk defendants who are under-
supervised and lower risk defendants who are over-supervised may cause more harm to the community.
The new practices are not intended to reduce the judgment or discretion of judges and attorneys but
provide an evidenced based risk assessment to provide useful information in the bond decision making
process. The ultimate reason for the changes is to more effectively achieve two (2) purposes: ensure the
defendant’s presence at future court appearances and maximize public safety by minimizing pre-trial
misconduct. The 10th Judicial District has implemented the Colorado Pretrial Assessment Tool (“CPAT”)
Version 2.1, which is an empirically based assessment instrument. Information comes from an interview
with the defendant and information from various data bases. In addition, domestic violence offenders are
administered a validated domestic violence risk tool.
The SMART (Supervision Matrix Assessment & Recommendation Tool) Praxis is designed to specify what
level of supervision is recommended for a particular case, again based on the defendant’s CPAT risk score
and the most serious crime charged. The various possible supervision levels are: no pre-trial supervision,
Basic, Enhanced or Intensive. In unusual circumstances, judges may find good cause to order a supervision
level different from the recommendations. Judges may also order additional conditions of supervision not
automatically included in a particular level of supervision, such as substance testing. The Bond Guidelines
are used by Judges and attorneys when making decisions regarding the type, amount and conditions of
bond. These guidelines provide a presumptive type of bond, level of pre-trial supervision, and a wide range
for setting the amount of the bond if a cash or surety bond is deemed appropriate. These initial
presumptions will be based on a consideration of the CPAT risk score of the specific defendant, and the
crime category or column within the defendant’s case is categorized based on the most serious.
Vivitrol Program
In February of 2017, the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office enacted a new substance abuse prevention
program with the goal of assisting inmates as they prepare for re-entry into the community. Pueblo
County Jail is the first jail in Colorado to offer such a program. In cooperation with other organizations, the
program sought to decrease recidivism. The inmates are offered the drug, Vivitrol which blocks cravings
for alcohol and opiates, to aid in their sobriety.
Does the program work?

A recent article in the Pueblo Chieftain focused on a former inmate of the Pueblo County Jail who
voluntarily signed up for the pilot program upon his release from jail and his thoughts of the program.
(See Appendix News Release_Vivitrol Program and Pueblo Chieftain article)
21 | P a g e
TREATMENT CENTER
In 2016, an analysis of the incarcerated population in the Pueblo County Jail was conducted. In the
analysis, several elements were studied pertaining to cost of housing, length of stay, and history of
charges. Overall there were a total of 1,107 inmates identified as having an opioid heroin use; of that
total, a sample size of 300 were examined. The total identified heroin use of individuals accounted for 12%
of the total population in 2016. The average length of stay for this population was 73 days, which cost
upwards of $1,379,000. In addition to substance abuse, county jails are the largest providers of mental
health care in the nation.
The Treatment Center will treat both substance abuse and adults to mental disorders, the concept an
actual Treatment Center began. A Treatment Center will provide a continuum of care to break the cycle of
incarceration. Additionally, severe mental health cases who have not committed serious crimes need
mental health care, not incarceration. Clients will fall into 4 groups: Detoxification, Substance Abuse,
Mental Health, and Acute Mental Health.
Goals and Benefits of the Proposed Treatment Center

 Focused effort on Pueblo County and region’s opioid epidemic
 Unification of both medical and treatment communities
 Reduce strain on health care community and the county jail
 Reprioritize health care spending to a more focused solution
 Provide an environment for those in need
 Reduce overcrowding in the jail
 Allow sheriff’s deputies and police offices to focus on the criminal population and law
enforcement, and get back on the street faster
 Create a more productive citizenry, by reducing recidivism
 Create an environment more conducive to healing and rehabilitation
 Resource center, referrals to all agencies
 Increase inpatient/outpatient services
 Peer and family support
 Life Skills and Vocational Training
 Youth support services
User Groups
 Those with mental health issues including:
- Individuals brought to jail for minimal infractions initiated by a mental health issue
- Individuals identified with mental health issues who may not be taken to jail
 Those addicted to opiates – both from jail and those in need in the community
 Those addicted to alcohol – both from jail and those in need in the community
 Those who have progressed in jail programs preparing for societal re-entry
Operations
 The existing dormitories would be re-purposed to house the Treatment Center
 Sheriff’s Office will be responsible for facility oversite, while setting the safety and security
standards for the Treatment Center
 The Treatment Center would be leased and staffed through a public/private partnership with local
treatment providers.
22 | P a g e
 The facility will be made up of three (3) main treatment areas, office space, and program space to
allow individuals to get back on their feet and gain the skill to cope and get out of the revolving
door of incarceration
- Mental Health – which will require extended residency housing for extensive treatment
- Drug Treatment – few will require housing
- Detoxification Treatment – not likely to require
 The facility will be staffed by a collection of treatment experts from the interested and supportive
parties listed above
 There are five intercept points for placement into the treatment center
1. Law Enforcement Determination - from their trained crisis intervention team (c.i.t) before
any arrest is made
2. Law Enforcement determination after initial detention and initial court hearing
3. Jail based mental health team evaluation and a specialty drug court
4. Individuals meeting criteria for “re-entry treatment plans” allowing for coordinated
transition with community providers
5. Those on probation or parole maintaining a continuity of care, utilizing graduated
responses
 Additionally, people in the community who voluntarily commit themselves to detox and or drug
treatment services would meet the criteria for placement.
Below is a possible configuration for the re-purposing of the dormitories. Specific cost estimates for the
layout are on the next page.
23 | P a g e
Treatment Center Cost Estimates
24 | P a g e
25 | P a g e
SHORT-TERM SOLUTIONS
Several short-term solutions were studied by the Jail Task Force that had the potential to be effective in
augmenting capacity in the short-run. Each short-term option considered could provide immediate relief
to the current overcrowding at the jail, but also had very different upfront capital and ongoing operational
costs associated with it. A consistent drawback amongst all short-term solutions; however, was the inability
to provide enough additional capacity that in conjunction with the design capacity of the current jail (509),
would reconcile average daily population (ADP) numbers of 760+.
Out of all the short-term solutions studied that would result in the operation of a “satellite” jail to add
immediate capacity, the renovation of Building 020 at Colorado Mental Health Institute of Pueblo (CMHIP)
is the best option. As mentioned further down in the report, one of the major reasons this option is difficult
to justify, is that even with the significant upfront capital investment and ongoing operational costs to
execute this option, the space at Building 020 still does not bring design capacity to the APD of today or for
the near future.
While evaluating each structure was the primary responsibility of the Building Sub-Committee, it was a
blend of members from the Jail Task Force that helped provide input for the ultimate building reports that
can be seen in the Appendix. A summary of each short-term option considered is provided below.
Option
1. CMHIP Building 020 (Old Forensics Building)
2. Centennial South Penitentiary II
3. Huerfano County Correctional Center
4. Other CMHIP buildings
26 | P a g e
Option 1: Colorado Mental Health Institute at Pueblo – Building 020
Building 020 on the CMHIP campus, currently known as the Old Forensic Max Security building, has been
discussed since 2013 and again in 2017. The building was originally constructed in 1974. Housing is
separated into four different units of 21 rooms each, for a total of 84 beds. Building 20 could possibly
provide additional capacity for 168 beds if double bunked. It is important to note that legal requirements
of CMHIP for housing mentally ill patients versus inmates are distinctly different and thus require different
building improvements for bringing up to code. It should also be noted that Building 020 was originally
vacated due to deteriorating infrastructure years ago.
Outdated Control Room
Financials Considerations Outdated Locks
Starting Capital Costs On-Going Costs

$4.5 million ($4-5m estimate) Rent - $0.00
Furniture - $68,176 Staffing - $1,302,658
Misc. Supplies - $52,400 Medical - $362,000
Kitchen - $201,655
Visitation - $28,000
Utilities - $179,575
Maintenance -207,025
TOTAL - $4.620,576m TOTAL - $2,280,913
Conclusion
 With the building being owned by the Colorado Department of Human Services, a lease/purchase
agreement would need to be negotiated
 Estimated cost to bring the Building 020 up to standard is between $4-5 million
 The time to perform the work could take 9 – 12 months, not completely addressing the current
overcrowding issues
 The use of Building 020 would need to run through the state legislature
 Starting capital plus on-going operational costs, result in approximately $14,097,956 over the
course of 5 years for a building that still does not get the Sheriff’s Office to a proper design
capacity today or for the future
 The County would be investing a significant amount of money into a building that they still would
not own or be able to repurpose in the future. (See Appendix for full Building 020 Report and
Sheriff’s Office Memo)
27 | P a g e
Option 2 and 3: Centennial South Penitentiary (CSP II) & Huerfano
Correctional Center
Utilizing empty state prisons such as Centennial South Penitentiary (CSP II) or a private prison such as the
Huerfano County Correctional Center, has been a long-standing sentiment in the community. While both
options were thoroughly considered by the Jail Task Force to augment capacity, it should also be duly
noted when considering state or private prisons to augment capacities of jails, that there are stark
differences between state prisons and county jails. Specifically, the primary purpose of the Pueblo County
Jail is to safely house pre-adjudicated inmates while awaiting and going though trial. This constant
movement and obligation to transport inmates to and from court, is distinctly different from a state prison
that is not concerned with proximity to courts or legal services.
With that said, Centennial South Penitentiary (CSP II) and the Huerfano County Correctional Center were
studied to provide additional capacity to the Pueblo County Jail.
Centennial South Penitentiary Campus (CSP II)

 Located in Fremont County, approximately 41 miles east of Pueblo
 948 bed facility originally constructed in 2010
 One tower previously occupied in 2010 as an administrative segregation facility
 Inmates were moved from campus in 2012; with food services, laundry, and other services left
open to serve CCF North Campus
 The building is actually partially occupied, with the State of Colorado intending to revitalize the
entire campus
 Added cost to rent/lease the space from the State of Colorado
 Added cost to contract for food services
 The State is requesting funding and intends to construct recreation yards that were not built
previously for housing
 The creation of recreation yards and reopening of the CSP II campus will supplement insufficient
bed space with DOC
 Transportation costs would increase to transfer inmates to and from court (See Appendix for
Transportation Model)
Huerfano County Correctional Center

 Located in Huerfano County, 51 miles south of Pueblo
 752 bed facility
 Closed in 2010
 Transportation costs would increase to transfer inmates to and from court (See Appendix for
Transportation Model)
28 | P a g e
Financial Considerations for Both Options
Supplies - $130,000 Lease - $3m
Initial Staffing - $300,000 Staffing - $6m
Food Service - $250,000
Transportation - $625,000
TOTAL - $430,000 TOTAL - $10,275,000
Conclusion
*With food and other infrastructure services at CSP II already being used to support the CCF North
campus, and with the State’s intention to modify and occupy the CSP II facility to handle their increased
population; CSP II is clearly not an option for Pueblo County.
*In addition to the State’s intention to reopen CSP II, they are also aiming to lease the Huerfano County
Correctional Center (CCA) to handle an overflow in population on an interim basis, during the
construction of the recreation yards at CSP II. Regardless of the immediate availability of CCA, this
option was still financially modeled out by the Jail Task Force.
Option 4 – Other CMHIP Buildings

Other buildings on the CMHIP campus were also considered for repurposing as housing space for inmates.
Due to spacial arrangement, ease of access, and other factors it was clear that the best vacant building to
repurpose was Building 020.
(See Appendix for full map of CMHIP campus).
29 | P a g e
CONSIDERATIONS FOR A NEW JAIL
While the short-term options considered by the Jail Task Force laid out ways to immediately supplement
capacity, all long-term options, except for building onto the existing jail, considered possible ways of building
a new jail. But prior to taking a deeper dive into each long-term solution, there are several overarching
considerations when it comes to building a new jail that need to be understood first.
Some of these considerations include:

 If a new jail were to be built, where should it be placed?
 What should the capacity of a new jail be for Pueblo County now and in the future?
 What designs for a jail should be considered?
 How would staffing costs of a new jail differ between designs?
 What are the opportunity costs of building a jail away from the Dennis Maes Judicial Building?
Specifically, what are transportation costs in each scenario?
 How could existing programs in the jail, for example the Vivitrol program, be enhanced in a new
jail?
 Could a new jail incorporate new programs, such as the introduction of college and job training
programs? Could the work release program be brought back?
To answer some of these questions, a need for additional expertise to supplement the efforts of the task
force became evident. The following additions took place mid-study:
 A need for a jail Master Planning project was identified by the task force. The Master Plan would
help answer many of the engineering and structural questions still outstanding. The Master Plan
would also help provide some definition and a potential cost to repurpose the existing dormitories
of the jail. HOK was ultimately selected to perform this work through a professional service
agreement.
 There was also a need for additional financial expertise pertaining to methods of financing a new
jail, bond measures, transportation costs, and other financial analysis. Deb Hinsvark from Ehlers,
Inc. was ultimately selected to perform this work.
 Finally, a “Site Selection” subcommittee was added to the Jail Task Force for the sole purpose of
identifying prospective areas of Pueblo County that should be considered for building a new jail.
Information on the work of HOK, Ehlers, and the Site Selection subcommittee are listed below.
Ehlers
Ehlers, Inc. was hired by the Pueblo County Commissioners to provide financial modelling as needed and as
directed during the term of the study. Ehlers was available to any committee to provide a financial model
if desired. As the study progressed, Ehlers constructed a model to predict the bed capacity that would be
needed in the future based on history.
Ehlers also created models to evaluate transportation costs if a jail was built that was not connected to the
Dennis Maes Judicial Building. Models were completed for several remote sites. In addition, Ehlers provided
the task force with alternate financing options for the final jail project, and will continue to work with the
Commissioners as they consider a ballot question related to financing the facility.
30 | P a g e
Staff/Transportation Study
Working with Pueblo County Sheriff staff, Ehlers created two transportation models. The first assumes a
jail is built within seven (7) miles of the Dennis Maes Judicial Building and the second assumes it is
constructed outside the County and approximately 51 miles from the Judicial Building.
In the first model, four (4) deputies and one (1) clerical staff are added to personnel, and salaries are set at
current rates with a 2.5% annual increase. Three vans and one 22-passenger bus are purchased and
depreciated over ten (10) years. It is assumed that there will be six (6) trips per day. The anticipated costs
are as follows:
In the second model, six (6) deputies are added as well as one (1) clerical staff. Again, salaries are set at
current rates and increased 2.5% annually. The same number of vehicles are added as before, but they are
depreciated over five (5) years because of the extra mileage which will cause more wear and tear. It is
expected that trips will be better consolidated and reduced to five (5) per day. That model follows:
31 | P a g e
Future Inmate Projection Study
The model indicates that if Pueblo County’s historic trends continue, the average daily population of the jail
in 2050 will be around 1300 inmates. It should be noted that this is the average daily population projection.
Note: The schedule shows the 2018 average is expected to be 665, but in truth the jail has a need to
accommodate more than that daily. The aim of the JTF is that through alternatives to incarceration,
including the Treatment Center, this trajectory population could be reversed.
32 | P a g e
HOK
Throughout the work of the Jail Task Force and as stated previously, there were several reasons that deemed
a professional study necessary. Even with the diligent work of the building subcommittee, several questions
remained.
 What was net difference in construction costs between building a linear/vertical jail behind the
Dennis Maes Judicial Building versus building a horizontal jail at a remote location?
 Was there a way to configure a horizontal jail at the Judicial building site by reconfiguring the
previous site plan proposed?
 How many posts would be required by the Sheriff’s Office in a vertical versus horizontal jail
structure?
 Would the Board of Pueblo County Commissioners need to provide additional deputies if a new
jail was built? How many deputies would be needed for each scenario?
 What is the projected cost of repurposing the existing jail as a detox/treatment center?
Several design firms were considered and contacted, including: Reilly Johnson, DLR, and HOK. The firm
selected for conducting this study was not put through the County’s RFP process only because of the time
that the formal process would have taken. Once it was determined that 2017 is the most desirable political
year to ask for voter assistance, a very tight deadline was realized. It was also understood that if a funding
source became available for the construction of a new jail, all professional services, including the contract
for overall design, would flow through Pueblo County’s RFP process. Based upon on several meetings with
the Sheriff’s Office and Commissioner Ortiz, HOK was selected based upon their caliber of expertise,
understanding of the study to be conducted, and past portfolio of work.
HOK, who was recognized by Building Design + Construction as the #1 government architecture firm in 2016
and one of the global leaders in detention facility design, proposed a study based upon two objectives:
constructing a new jail and repurposing the existing dormitories of the jail as a detox and treatment center
accessible to the community. The scope of work for HOK was broken into two phases: Phase 1A and Phase
1B.
HOK will create:

 A space plan and program while working with the County Officials, the Sheriff’s Department, Jail
Task Force Leadership, designated JTF Committees, and other key stakeholders
 Report findings to the Pueblo County Officials and the Jail Task Force Leadership
 Provide a facility site master plan including conceptual site plans, floor plans, and exterior imaging
 The deliverables provided by HOK will include the cost estimates for both the Construction Cost
estimate and Total Project Cost estimate
The HOK report will include:

1. Executive Summary
2. Design Images – Conceptual: Site Plans, Floor Plans and Exterior Images
3. Review of concepts with County officials and the leadership of the Jail Task Force
4. Building Systems Narratives – Civil, Architectural, Structural, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Life
Safety / Fire Protection, Security Electronic Control Systems
5. Space program for the new jail and Treatment Center
6. Furniture test-fit diagrams for specialty spaces such as intake, book-in areas, cells/dayrooms. This
will not furniture layouts for typical offices spaces
7. Adjacency diagrams
33 | P a g e
Option A
Master Plan for what is required to provide the County with a defensible and cost efficient Jail System
Master Plan to meet the County’s needs for the next 25 years. This will include a project estimate to be
used for a bond measure for this project.
Option B
Master Plan where HOK will provide an assessment of how the existing Dorms may be repurposed as a
Treatment Center; work with County officials and the task force to determine the proposed type of services
and housing needed; and provide a project cost estimate for repurposing of the facility that will also be used
for the bond measure addressed in Phase 1A.
This Pueblo Treatment Center is not a standard type of detention building/space. Our team along with our
in-house jail mental and medical healthcare specialists will need to meet with a number of different and
additional groups to discuss and determine what spaces they will need for mental health support, detox
space, and drug treatment in addition to the understanding the process of intake and acceptance of patients
/inmates/etc.
Option A Deliverables
1. Determine the County’s jail system long-term needs
 Inmate projections
 Housing, kitchen, laundry, and infirmary needs
 Staffing projections
2. Determine County jail and law enforcement center’s space needs
3. Create a “space program and master plan” for these needs / options including conceptual site plans,
floor plans, and exterior imaging
4. Evaluate various potential jail site options for the County
5. Convert these options to cost estimates
6. Work with professional cost estimator to validate and firm up the estimate intended to be used for
a bond measure
7. Provide the length of time to complete this task – the project schedule
8. Establish a fee for providing this task and a cost estimate for the master plan
9. Construction Delivery Method options
Option B Deliverables
1. Working with the County officials and Jail Task Force to understand the type of mental and medical
healthcare services the County would like to provide from this facility so we know how to plan
2. Work with the County officials and Jail Task Force to identify preliminary criteria for patient
acceptance, the intake process, and the level of security requirements for the Treatment Center
3. Providing a space list and program for these services along with a projected number beds to fulfill
these needs
4. Identify what special equipment that be needed for the Treatment Center
5. Provide a cost estimate for repurposing the dorms and turning them into a Treatment Center
34 | P a g e
Building and Site Selection Sub-Committees
These sub-committees gathered and provided information on both design and all possible sites for building
a new jail. The information was forwarded to HOK so they could model out building footprints and possible
locations.
Horizontal versus Vertical

 Staffing Considerations - A multilevel design jail that requires guards on each floor, can drive staffing
costs to unaffordable levels. To properly manage the behavior of inmates on each floor, a staff post
should be staffed on each floor
 Movement and Delivery of Services – Time consuming and complicated in a multilevel facility
 Fire Safety & Evacuation - Multiple levels add to fire safety complications in terms of design and
evacuation
 Maintenance Costs - The potential exists for increased costs due to maintenance problems and
management of operations
 Loss of control – With a vertically connected jail, there could be a loss of control during an incident on
any floor unless special precautions are taken
 Expansion – No footprint for expansion
Site Parameters
In addition to the design considerations, parameters were established for the location of a new jail.
 Vacant parcels over 13 acres and within a 10-mile radius from the current judicial building
 ½ mile from schools, K-12
 ½ mile from residential zoning districts in the city
 ½ mile from residential zoning districts in the county
 ¼ mile from current marijuana facilities
 Within a ¼ mile of electrical distribution
 Within a ¼ mile of water distribution
Map provided
by Pueblo
County
Geographic
Information
Systems
35 | P a g e
LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS
As stated previously, all long-term solutions studied by the Jail Task Force, except for adding onto the
existing jail, encompassed building a new jail. And as the true costs to implement some of the short-term
solutions became known, the task force began taking a more serious look at the possibility of building a new
jail.
Four of the long-term options (1-4) originally proposed were considered in greatest detail and are
discussed below.
Option
1. Complete overhaul of existing facility
2. New jail behind Dennis Maes Judicial Building
3. New jail at remote location
4. Phased approach
5. PuebloPlex
6. County financing
36 | P a g e
Option: 1 – Renovation and Expansion of Existing Jail
The first long-term option that the task force wanted to study was the possible renovation and expansion
of the existing County jail. How could the County work with the facility it already has? Below are some of
the pros and cons of each option. The largest upside to this option is the cheaper price tag relative to the
construction of a new facility. However, the required number of beds for the future would still not be
attainable with this option. (See the Appendix for Addition & Renovation Report)
Pros Cons
 Treatment aspect eliminated
 Cheaper price tag
 Not scalable for future needs
 Accessibility to public
 Limited with vertical structure
 Downtown, but still removed from
courts
Financial Considerations
Starting Capital Costs *On-Going Costs
$42-56m Rent - $0
Misc. Supplies - $52,400 Staffing -$1,302,658
Medical - $362,000
Kitchen - $201,655
Maintenance -$207,025m
TOTAL - $42-56m TOTAL - $2,270,913m
37 | P a g e
Option: 2 - New Jail Behind Dennis Maes Judicial Building
The second option considered was similar to the design of a new jail behind the Dennis Maes Judicial
Building that was originally proposed in 2015. The original design by Reilley Johnson (see Appendix for 2015
configuration) was for a 4-story structure. Due to higher construction and ongoing operational costs
associated with a vertical structure, as discussed on page 30, this site was revisited with HOK. HOK provided
the rendering below that shows a 2-story grouping of housing units. The 2-story build was achieved
primarily by plans to acquire additional property and shifting the parking to that area. Some of the pros and
cons to this option are shown below.
Pros Cons
 Treatment aspect included  High price tag
 Transportation costs reduced  High site work costs
 Highest security level of inmate  Limited ability to expand
transport

*Note: Personnel, operational, and other
associated costs in regard to this option will be
$139m completed with the final delivery of the HOK
Jail Master plan to be provided mid-September
2017
TOTAL - $139m
38 | P a g e
Option: 3 - New Jail – Remote Location
As mentioned earlier in the report, a major component of HOK’s work was to provide a jail site analysis
to the County on a new jail behind the Dennis Maes Judicial building versus a new jail constructed at a
more remote location. HOK provided the rendering below of a possible layout for a 1-story jail on a 15-
17 acre parcel of land. It is important to note that the costs for this model would vary depending upon
the ultimate site selected. Some of the pros and cons to a remote build are listed below.
Pros Cons
 Treatment aspect included  Transportation costs
 Most scalable for future  Accessibility to public
expansion
 Moderate price tag
 Secure perimeter
*Note: Personnel, operational, and other
associated costs in regard to this option will be
$123m
completed with the final delivery of the HOK Jail
Master plan to be provided mid-September 2017
TOTAL - $123m
39 | P a g e
Option: 4 - New Jail – Phased Approach
The idea of a phased approach to constructing a new jail is based on the premise of building what is
needed today and harnessing revenue streams that could be produced from the housing of inmates
(Municipal, DOC, and Federal holds) to fund the construction of additional wings in the future.
For example, a remote site could be acquired with administrative offices and 1-2 wings originally
constructed. Hypothetically, you could use the first wing to help with current overflow and use the
additional wing solely to generate revenue from the municipal/DOC/federal holds. The overall idea is
to significantly lower the initial costs of construction, provide a portion of beds to help with
overcrowding, and create a funding source for further construction.
While intuitively this appeared a workable model, several assumptions challenged the feasibility of this
option.
 Future construction is completely dependent upon unpredictable revenue streams from various
inmate holds
 If revenue streams from inmate holds were not consistent, future expansion could not be funded
 The Sheriff’s Office would be placed in the same position of staffing two different jails as discussed
in some of the short-term options, such as the Building 020 scenario
 Staffing costs for this scenario would be resemble the CSPII or private prison option (approximately
$6m)
Pros
 Scalable for future
expansion
 Moderate price tag
 Very secure – overall
Cons Central
 Unstable revenue streams Administration
 Huge inefficiencies with split & Phase 1
campus
 Transportation costs
 Treatment aspect excluded
*Personnel, operational and other

associated costs with this option are
difficult to estimate at this point, but
$89.9m
would be similar to Option 1 of the
Short-Term Solution, where a split
campus would exist.
TOTAL - $89.9m
40 | P a g e
Option: 5 – PuebloPlex at U.S. Army Pueblo Chemical Depot
The possibility of a housing scenario through Pueblo Plex at the Pueblo Chemical Depot was also mentioned
and studied by the Jail Task Force. The Building subcommittee looked at retrofitting some of the vacant
buildings on the campus of the Chemical Depot to house inmates.
Other than an obviously far distance to and from the courts, the unavailability of these vacant buildings for
several years out, and Federal regulations that would most likely disbar buildings with previously used
spaces to store mustard agent as now housing for inmates, the simple cost of a water treatment plant at
$29m to accommodate the housing 800+ inmates alone makes this option impractical. This additional cost
of $29m is a primary reason that constructing a new jail at this location could potentially cost $175m plus.
(See Appendix for full Building Report).
Pros
 Treatment aspect included
 Scalable for future
expansion
Cons
 Tremendous construction
costs
 Highest transportation costs

*Note: Personnel, operational, and
other associated costs with this option
$175m
will be similar to operating a single
story jail at a remote location
TOTAL - $175m
41 | P a g e
Option: 6 – A New Jail Through County Financing
Another option that certainly needs to be asked when it comes to financing a new jail, regardless of where
it is placed, is could Pueblo County government possibly bear the cost? Not only is this option critical to
consider in hopes of not having to propose a tax increase to the community as a funding stream, but it also
important to note how Pueblo County could finance a new jail through the cutting of other County
services if litigation forced the County to do so. The analysis below prepared by Pueblo County’s Office of
Budget and Finance, delineates between mandated and non-mandated services and the cuts needed to fit
the debt service of constructing a new jail into the current General Fund.
Paying for Jail Debt Service Within Current General Fund Budget
Pueblo County Government performs many mandated services for the community and includes the costs to
run multiple elected offices (Sheriff, District Attorney, Coroner, Treasurer, Assessor, Clerk & Recorder,
Surveyor). Most of the cost centers of the County are funded in the General Fund. Many departments of
the county charge fees to support the costs of their operations or are funded with state and federal grants,
but the largest majority of the costs are paid for with Property and Sales Taxes. Not counting grant funded
programs or one time capital needs, the general fund budget is expected to be $72 million dollars in 2018.
The following chart shows the expected 2018 general fund revenues:
Other
7%
Direct
charge for
service
18%
Property Taxes
Sales & Use Tax 55%
20%
42 | P a g e
The following chart shows the expected allocation of these dollars to cost centers:
Facilities
5% District Attorney
6%
Economic Incentives
8%
All Other
36%
Debt Service
9%
Sheriff-Law
Enforcement
11%
Sheriff-Detention
25%
The category “All Other” includes 29 centers each with a cost less than $3 million. Note that the cost of the
jail comprises 25% of the general fund budget.
Financing a new jail is expected to result in an average annual debt service payment of approximately $8.9
million. To help put that in perspective, the following chart shows the new debt service payment (in red)
against other major cost centers of the County:
Sheriff-Detention
Estimated Jail Debt Service
Sheriff-Law Enforcement
Current Debt Service (Judicial, Health Dept)
Tax Incentive Refunds
District Attorney
Facilities
Information Technology Services
Intergovernmental / Community Health
Utilities
County Clerk & Recorder
Assessor
County Attorney
Fleet
($'s Shown in Millions)
$- $2 $4 $6 $8 $10 $12 $14 $16 $18 $20
43 | P a g e
In order to finance debt service payments without a new revenue source, we would have to make significant
cuts in the general fund budget. There are certain areas of the budget that are not conducive to cuts (i.e.,
current debt service payments, utilities, economic tax incentive payments). Approximately $14 million
comes off the table when cuts are considered as the following chart shows:
Not Available for cuts:
Utilities
Tax Incentive Refunds $58.4
Available for
Other Administration-Debt Service
cuts
It would take a 15% cut in costs to fit in the new debt service. Cost centers like the jail, which represents
31% of the $58 million to be considered for cuts, are already bursting at the seams in their budgets and
likely cannot be cut.
The County has been operating at a deficit for several years and is still struggling to fit in the large debt
service payment resulting from previous major construction which was done WITHOUT a tax increase (the
Judicial Center and the City-County Health Department).
Applying the recent Marijuana Sales Tax Revenue to the problem is not the solution. The total marijuana
taxes expected in the 2018 budget total $1.4 million. The policy of the County is to work toward applying
this revenue to one time needs of the community that address any perceived negative impacts of having
legalized marijuana. Much of the funds in the past have been used to help offset revenue shortfalls during
the recessionary period. In any event, the amount potentially available is far short of the amount needed
to finance a new jail.
To take on a new cost this large, there would be cuts to mandated programs in the county that citizens
would notice. Sheriff response times would increase, license plate renewal lines would lengthen, Victim’s
service support would decline. Important quality of life functions would not be supported which would
likely cause closures or large reductions in services to agencies like the Sangre de Cristo Arts Center, the
Pueblo Zoo, Animal Shelter, HARP, YMCA, 4-H, Runyon Field, County swim programs, various day care
centers, Human Relations Commission.
In conclusion, without a tax increase, the jail situation will continue to fester with little or no ability to take
improvements.
44 | P a g e
45 | P a g e
FINANCING A NEW JAIL
Two options exist for financing the new jail – revenue bonds and general obligation bonds. Revenue bonds
would be supported by an increase in sales tax. According to Ehlers, general obligation bonds would be
supported by an increased property tax. Pueblo County is economically healthy, and it is believed a rating
of “A to AA” would be achieved for this financing. Numbers have been generated using the current interest
rates of an A-rated, tax-exempt municipal bond plus 50 basis points for revenue bonds and AA plus 50 basis
points for general obligation bonds. In other words, half a percentage point was added to the expected
interest rate of each maturity to accommodate any fluctuations in the market between now and the time
the bonds are offered for sale.
Revenue Bond
Sales tax is a volatile revenue – quick to respond to changes in the economic climate. Thus, investors look
for good coverage ratios (the amount of tax collected/debt service) in projected tax collection figures in
order to accommodate shifts in the economy. The minimum coverage ratio considered in the analysis was
125% - revenues will cover debt service 1.25 times. A revenue bond will also require a debt service reserve.
The analysis assumes the debt itself will fund the debt service reserve and the reserve will be used to pay
the final debt service payment. And, as stated earlier, an A rating plus 50 basis points was used when
establishing the interest rate on the bonds. The following chart is a comparison of three bond scenarios
that could be accomplished with a 0.45 cent sales and use tax increase using the assumptions as outlined:
Par Amount Project Funds Debt Costs to Total NIC Total Net Average
of the Bonds Generated Service Issue Years Debt Service Annual
Reserve Coverage
$150,165,000 $140,000,000 $9,270,245 $890,825 30 4.258% $266,931,571 1.28 X
$139,425,000 $130,000,000 $8,607,406 $817,124 30 4.258 % $247,845,471 1.38 X
$138,815,000 $128,828,426 $9,172,499 $814,075 25 4.100% $218,254,519 1.25 X
General Obligation Bond

A general obligation bond is a pledge of the full faith and credit of the County. It is possible to make this
pledge with a property tax initiative because the County can set a mill levy necessary to pay the debt service
each year, regardless of changes in property values or assessment percentages. GO’s usually garner a higher
credit rating than revenue bonds, and a rating of AA is assumed for these GO’s. Once again, interest rates
were grossed up by 50 basis points to be prepared for market fluctuations. A GO bond will generally cost
the same amount to issue as a revenue bond, but it will not require a debt service reserve. The following
table provides comparisons of 20, 25 and 30-year GO’s for funding a $130,000,000 project:
Par Amount of Years NIC Total Net Maximum Mill Levy Annual cost Annual cost
Bonds Debt Service Annual Debt Required increase for a increase for a
Service home valued business
at $300K valued at
$10mm
$130,775,000 20 2.989% $173,426,547 $8,672,874 5.041744 $108.90 $14,621
$130,775,000 25 3.125% $188,544,094 $7,544,194 4.385616 $94.73 $12,718
$130,775,000 30 3.273% $204,393,758 $6,815,223 3.961848 $85.58 $11,489
46 | P a g e
Sales and Use Tax Revenue Bonds to Finance the Pueblo County Jail
After careful consideration and much conversation, it appears that the use of a 0.45 cent sales and use tax
to fund a jail that will cost approximately $140,000,000 is the most likely scenario for the County’s ballot
question. This enables constituents to know exactly their out of pocket cost given both the amount and the
term will be definite and limited.
Ehlers’ created a transaction to demonstrate this bond. The sources and uses of the bond transaction are
shown on the following table:
Sources of Funds
Par Amount of the Bonds $150,165,000.00
Total Sources $150,165,000.00
Uses of Funds
Total Underwriter’s Discount 750,825.00
Costs of Issuance 140,000.00
Deposit to Debt Service Reserve Fund 9,270,245.60
Deposit to Project Construction Fund $140,000,000.00
Rounding 3,929.40
Total Uses $150,165,000.00
As noted previously, the par amount of the bonds exceeds the amount needed for the project. This
enables the funding of a Debt Service Reserve which remains in the hands of the trustee until the final
bond year and is then used to pay most of the final payment. The Debt Service Reserve provides security
for the bondholders and facilitates a stronger bond rating.
When Ehlers structured the debt service for this bond, they assumed revenues would increase over time.
Additional assumptions include using current market rates for an A rated bond sale plus 50 basis points (or
½ percent) to accommodate fluctuations in the market between now and the sale date. As a basis, Ehlers
provides an example of a par issue bond sale with no premiums or discounts. Using revenues that are
expected to be collected from this incremental sales and use tax, the Debt Service Schedule shown on the
following page can be successfully covered over the thirty years of the transaction. True Interest Cost on
this transaction is 4.23395%. True interest cost is the rate that will discount all future cash payments so the
sum of the present value of all cash flows will equal the bond proceeds. Municipal debt interest is tax
exempt at the federal level and, generally, also state tax exempt for interest on Colorado issued municipal
bonds owned by Colorado residents. Thus, municipal bond rates are lower than conventional financing.
Additionally, the municipal market rates have remained low and demand continues to be high.
47 | P a g e
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I DSR Net New D/S Fiscal Total
01/15/2018 - - - - - - -
11/01/2018 2,720,000.00 1.600% 4,749,174.99 7,469,174.99 - 7,469,174.99 7,469,174.99
05/01/2019 - - 2,967,231.25 2,967,231.25 - 2,967,231.25 -
11/01/2019 1,635,000.00 1.700% 2,967,231.25 4,602,231.25 - 4,602,231.25 7,569,462.50
05/01/2020 - - 2,953,333.75 2,953,333.75 - 2,953,333.75 -
11/01/2020 1,765,000.00 1.950% 2,953,333.75 4,718,333.75 - 4,718,333.75 7,671,667.50
05/01/2021 - - 2,936,125.00 2,936,125.00 - 2,936,125.00 -
11/01/2021 1,905,000.00 2.100% 2,936,125.00 4,841,125.00 - 4,841,125.00 7,777,250.00
05/01/2022 - - 2,916,122.50 2,916,122.50 - 2,916,122.50 -
11/01/2022 2,050,000.00 2.300% 2,916,122.50 4,966,122.50 - 4,966,122.50 7,882,245.00
05/01/2023 - - 2,892,547.50 2,892,547.50 - 2,892,547.50 -
11/01/2023 2,205,000.00 2.450% 2,892,547.50 5,097,547.50 - 5,097,547.50 7,990,095.00
05/01/2024 - - 2,865,536.25 2,865,536.25 - 2,865,536.25 -
11/01/2024 2,370,000.00 2.650% 2,865,536.25 5,235,536.25 - 5,235,536.25 8,101,072.50
05/01/2025 - - 2,834,133.75 2,834,133.75 - 2,834,133.75 -
11/01/2025 2,540,000.00 2.800% 2,834,133.75 5,374,133.75 - 5,374,133.75 8,208,267.50
05/01/2026 - - 2,798,573.75 2,798,573.75 - 2,798,573.75 -
11/01/2026 2,725,000.00 3.000% 2,798,573.75 5,523,573.75 - 5,523,573.75 8,322,147.50
05/01/2027 - - 2,757,698.75 2,757,698.75 - 2,757,698.75 -
11/01/2027 2,925,000.00 3.200% 2,757,698.75 5,682,698.75 - 5,682,698.75 8,440,397.50
05/01/2028 - - 2,710,898.75 2,710,898.75 - 2,710,898.75 -
11/01/2028 3,135,000.00 3.450% 2,710,898.75 5,845,898.75 - 5,845,898.75 8,556,797.50
05/01/2029 - - 2,656,820.00 2,656,820.00 - 2,656,820.00 -
11/01/2029 3,365,000.00 3.850% 2,656,820.00 6,021,820.00 - 6,021,820.00 8,678,640.00
05/01/2030 - - 2,592,043.75 2,592,043.75 - 2,592,043.75 -
11/01/2030 3,615,000.00 4.050% 2,592,043.75 6,207,043.75 - 6,207,043.75 8,799,087.50
05/01/2031 - - 2,518,840.00 2,518,840.00 - 2,518,840.00 -
11/01/2031 3,885,000.00 4.000% 2,518,840.00 6,403,840.00 - 6,403,840.00 8,922,680.00
05/01/2032 - - 2,441,140.00 2,441,140.00 - 2,441,140.00 -
11/01/2032 4,170,000.00 4.050% 2,441,140.00 6,611,140.00 - 6,611,140.00 9,052,280.00
05/01/2033 - - 2,356,697.50 2,356,697.50 - 2,356,697.50 -
11/01/2033 4,465,000.00 4.100% 2,356,697.50 6,821,697.50 - 6,821,697.50 9,178,395.00
05/01/2034 - - 2,265,165.00 2,265,165.00 - 2,265,165.00 -
11/01/2034 4,780,000.00 4.150% 2,265,165.00 7,045,165.00 - 7,045,165.00 9,310,330.00
05/01/2035 - - 2,165,980.00 2,165,980.00 - 2,165,980.00 -
11/01/2035 5,115,000.00 4.150% 2,165,980.00 7,280,980.00 - 7,280,980.00 9,446,960.00
05/01/2036 - - 2,059,843.75 2,059,843.75 - 2,059,843.75 -
11/01/2036 5,465,000.00 4.200% 2,059,843.75 7,524,843.75 - 7,524,843.75 9,584,687.50
05/01/2037 - - 1,945,078.75 1,945,078.75 - 1,945,078.75 -
11/01/2037 5,830,000.00 4.250% 1,945,078.75 7,775,078.75 - 7,775,078.75 9,720,157.50
05/01/2038 - - 1,821,191.25 1,821,191.25 - 1,821,191.25 -
11/01/2038 6,225,000.00 4.250% 1,821,191.25 8,046,191.25 - 8,046,191.25 9,867,382.50
05/01/2039 - - 1,688,910.00 1,688,910.00 - 1,688,910.00 -
11/01/2039 6,630,000.00 4.250% 1,688,910.00 8,318,910.00 - 8,318,910.00 10,007,820.00
05/01/2040 - - 1,548,022.50 1,548,022.50 - 1,548,022.50 -
11/01/2040 7,060,000.00 4.300% 1,548,022.50 8,608,022.50 - 8,608,022.50 10,156,045.00
05/01/2041 - - 1,396,232.50 1,396,232.50 - 1,396,232.50 -
11/01/2041 7,515,000.00 4.300% 1,396,232.50 8,911,232.50 - 8,911,232.50 10,307,465.00
05/01/2042 - - 1,234,660.00 1,234,660.00 - 1,234,660.00 -
11/01/2042 7,995,000.00 4.350% 1,234,660.00 9,229,660.00 - 9,229,660.00 10,464,320.00
05/01/2043 - - 1,060,768.75 1,060,768.75 - 1,060,768.75 -
11/01/2043 8,495,000.00 4.350% 1,060,768.75 9,555,768.75 - 9,555,768.75 10,616,537.50
05/01/2044 - - 876,002.50 876,002.50 - 876,002.50 -
11/01/2044 9,025,000.00 4.400% 876,002.50 9,901,002.50 - 9,901,002.50 10,777,005.00
05/01/2045 - - 677,452.50 677,452.50 - 677,452.50 -
11/01/2045 9,585,000.00 4.400% 677,452.50 10,262,452.50 - 10,262,452.50 10,939,905.00
05/01/2046 - - 466,582.50 466,582.50 - 466,582.50 -
11/01/2046 10,175,000.00 4.450% 466,582.50 10,641,582.50 - 10,641,582.50 11,108,165.00
05/01/2047 - - 240,188.75 240,188.75 - 240,188.75 -
11/01/2047 10,795,000.00 4.450% 240,188.75 11,035,188.75 (9,270,245.60) 1,764,943.15 2,005,131.90
Total $150,165,000.00 - $126,036,817.49 $276,201,817.49 (9,270,245.60) $266,931,571.89 -
48 | P a g e
PUEBLO COUNTY JAIL TASK FORCE CONCLUSION
Pueblo County, and the community overall, will be best served
from a financial and safety perspective, in constructing a new jail
that will be built to properly accommodate the current average
daily population of today and for decades to come. Pueblo County
should exercise all available financial resources to construct a new
jail and to refurbish the existing jail to become a detox and
treatment center for the community. Given the costs of possible
litigation, human lives, rising construction costs, urgent safety
concerns, and the need for detox and treatment in our community,
the Jail Task Force recommends that both components (a new jail
and detox/treatment center) be acted upon as soon as possible.
49 | P a g e
Appendix
April 12 News Release_Inmate Attack ........................................................................................................ 51

Human Resources Report............................................................................................................................ 52
Pueblo Chieftain Article_April 12 ................................................................................................................ 53
2015 Election Results .................................................................................................................................. 54
Reilly Johnson Study .................................................................................................................................... 55
Analysis of the Heroin Epidemic in Pueblo County ..................................................................................... 60
Crime/Cost Heroin Report........................................................................................................................... 64
News Release_Vivitrol Program .................................................................................................................. 65
Pueblo Chieftain Article_Vivitrol Program .................................................................................................. 66
Building Report_Colorado Mental Health Institute_Building 020 .............................................................. 67
CMHIP Campus Map ................................................................................................................................... 69
Staff Memo_CMHIP..................................................................................................................................... 70
Building Report_Addition & Renovation ..................................................................................................... 76
Staff Letter_18 August 2017 ....................................................................................................................... 79
Building Report_Phased Approach ............................................................................................................. 80
Building Report_Pueblo Plex ....................................................................................................................... 82
Transportation Study_7-mile Radius........................................................................................................... 84
Transportation Study_CSP II........................................................................................................................ 85
Transportation Study_Huerfano County State Prison ................................................................................ 86
Letter of Support ......................................................................................................................................... 87
50 | P a g e
51 | P a g e
Human Resources Report
52 | P a g e
Pueblo County jail facing a problem of felony proportions
BY RYAN SEVERANCE | RYANS@CHIEFTAIN.COM APR 12, 2017
As of Wednesday morning there were 754 inmates at the Pueblo Taylor said jail staff this year are finding more homemade shanks and
County jail, a jail designed to hold a capacity of 509. dangerous devices at the jail. The jail's population is putting a strain
on staffing at the facility as well.
Of those inmates there are 21 suspected of felony 1 crimes, the most
serious offense someone can be charged with. Felony 1 crimes The sheriff's office staffs multiple posts at the jail that must be covered
include, among other offenses, first-degree murder, first-degree at all times. Each post has five deputies at it.
kidnapping and drug possession with intent to distribute based on the
amount of drugs with which the person was found. That's usually in An increase in the jail's population has resulted in a necessary
excess of 100 grams. increase in posts.
Of the suspects in jail on felony 1 charges, 13 are in on suspicion of On one of the floors of the jail an old gymnasium that is being used as
homicide and awaiting trial, according to Jeff Teschner, the detention a minidorm, where some high-risk inmates are being held now and a
bureau chief with the Pueblo County Sheriff's Office. new post had to be created within that dorm setting, which ties up five
more deputies, Taylor said.
There also are 17 individuals in jail while they go through the judicial
process suspected of felony 2 crimes, which include, among other "When you don't have the staff, that becomes an all-overtime post,"
offenses, second-degree murder, second-degree kidnapping, human Taylor said. "We've had to create, based upon our population, three
trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude and unlawful termination of additional posts.
pregnancy.
Well, that's 15 deputies. We rely on overtime and so when you do that
There are a total of 350 inmates at the Pueblo County jail suspected your overtime increases. Your costs increase for taking care of an
of felonies ranging from felony 1 to felony 6, the least serious felony overabundance of inmates."
charge.
Further straining jail staff is the fact that inmates that score one or two
The sheer number of inmates overcrowding the jail and the number on the risk assessment need two deputies with them at all times for
of serious, high-risk offenders included in that population are a transport, whether that be to the judicial building for hearings, a
concern for Sheriff Kirk Taylor. medical call, when those inmates have recreation time and for other
purposes.
"The biggest concern we have is when you get an overpopulated jail,
you decrease the places within the facility that you can separate Another concern Taylor brought up is inmates coming into the jail who
people for their safety and staff safety," Taylor said. "When you triple- have to detox.
bunk in a cell that is designed to hold one prisoner and triple-bunk in
the maximum-security area, you're asking for problems." He said about 70 percent of the inmates who are booked into Pueblo
County jail are detoxing from drugs or alcohol, which can be
All inmates at the jail are given an assessment upon entry to dangerous. "You're seeing it across the country. You're seeing people
determine the security risk they pose. coming in and detoxing off of heroin. It has a lot to do with our opioid
epidemic and our alcohol epidemic and all of those things." Taylor said.
The inmates are then separated in jail based on their score from that
assessment with one being the highest risk and eight being the "We end up spending a lot of time and man hours detoxing people
lowest. when they first come into the facility. That's a pretty high number and
Those who score one and two are kept in maximum security; threes, so that concerns me a lot."
fours and fives are kept in medium security; and sixes, sevens and
eights are held in minimum security. Pueblo County Commissioner Garrison Ortiz recently formed a jail task
force to evaluate and recommend solutions to the problems the facility
Because of overcrowding, every area of the jail is being triple-bunked is facing.
including maximum security, where the most serious offenders are
jailed, Taylor said. "The largest concern is for the safety of the detention deputies and the
conditions that they work in each day," Ortiz told The Chieftain during
Many cells have "boat beds" -- mattresses that sit on top of a plastic a tour of the jail last week.
frame that resembles a raft -- on the floor next to the cell's two bunks. ryans@chieftain.com
Some inmates who have a risk score of two are having to be kept with
lower-risk offenders in the jail's dormitories due to space issues. INMATES FACING FELONIES
There are no cells in the dorm area and there's a 90-to-1 inmate to Felony 1 inmates -- 20 males, 1 female
deputy ratio there. Felony 2 inmates -- 14 males, 3 females
Issues at the jail that arise from these situations include assaults and Felony 3 inmates -- 59 males, 9 females
predatory behavior on behalf of the inmates. Felony 4 inmates -- 128 males, 32 females
Felony 5 inmates -- 34 males, 17 females
Last month three sheriff's office deputies sustained minor injuries in Felony 6 inmates -- 24 males, 9 females
two separate incidents at the jail involving unprovoked attacks by Total felony inmates -- 279 males, 71 females
inmates.
"My biggest fear is to have one of my employees get injured or having

one of my employees severely injured," Taylor said. "That incident we
had back in March was horrendous. A physical altercation by an
inmate on a deputy empowers those that are incarcerated."
53 | P a g e
2015 Election Results
BALLOT ISSUE NO. 1A:
SHALL PUEBLO COUNTY TAXES BE INCREASED BY APPROXIMATELY $18,000,000.00 ANNUALLY (FIRST FULL FISCAL YEAR DOLLAR INCREASE
STARTING IN 2016) TO DIRECTLY FUND THE URGENT PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS IDENTIFIED BY PUEBLO COUNTY SHERIFF KIRK M. TAYLOR, THE CHIEF
LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL SERVING ALL RESIDENTS OF THE CITIES, TOWNS AND UNINCORPORATED AREAS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF
PUEBLO COUNTY, AS CRITICAL TO PERFORMING HIS STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS TO ALL PUEBLO COUNTY RESIDENTS, BY INCREASING THE
COUNTY’S SALES AND USE TAX RATE BY ONE CENT ($0.01) PER DOLLAR; WHICH NEEDS ARE SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED IN THE AREAS OF PATROL,
CRIMINAL JUSTICE, DETENTION FACILITY AND EMERGENCY SERVICES WITH ALL REVENUES GENERATED TO BE RESTRICTED TO THE FOLLOWING
AND USED FOR NO OTHER PURPOSE:
1. PATROL NEEDS: HIRE, EMPLOY, FUND SALARIES, TRAIN AND EQUIP PATROL DEPUTIES, INVESTIGATORS AND CIVILIAN SUPPORT STAFF
ACCORDING TO CONTEMPORARY PRACTICE WITHIN THE STATE OF COLORADO; CONDUCT FIRE AND CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS; REPLACE
OBSOLETE AND FAILING EQUIPMENT, PURCHASE AMMUNITION, FUEL AND OTHER OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT; AND
2. CRIMINAL JUSTICE NEEDS: HIRE, EMPLOY, FUND SALARIES, TRAIN AND EQUIP DETENTION DEPUTIES, COURT TRANSPORT PERSONNEL AND
CIVILIAN SUPPORT STAFF ACCORDING TO CONTEMPORARY PRACTICE WITHIN THE STATE OF COLORADO; CONDUCT CRIMINAL
EXTRADITION; REPLACE OBSOLETE AND ACQUIRE NEW EQUIPMENT TO ADDRESS SECURITY, SAFETY, AND OPERATIONS; AND
3. DETENTION FACILITY NEEDS: REVIEW AND ASSESS NEEDS, DESIGN, ACQUIRE, CONSTRUCT, FUND TRANSITION COSTS, REPURPOSE, OPERATE
AND MAINTAIN DETENTION FACILITIES; AND
4. EMERGENCY SERVICES NEEDS: HIRE, EMPLOY, FUND SALARIES, TRAIN AND EQUIP EMERGENCY SERVICES BUREAU DEPUTIES AND CIVILIAN
SUPPORT STAFF ACCORDING TO CONTEMPORARY PRACTICE WITHIN THE STATE OF COLORADO IN THE AREA OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT; REPLACE OBSOLETE AND ACQUIRE NEW EQUIPMENT;
WITH THE SHERIFF REQUIRED TO REPORT ANNUALLY TO THE CITIZENS OF PUEBLO COUNTY ALL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES RESULTING
FROM SUCH TAX INCREASE; AND A CITIZENS’ ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO REVIEW ALL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES RESULTING FROM
SUCH TAX INCREASE; COMMENCING ON JANUARY 1, 2016 AND AUTOMATICALLY ENDING ON DECEMBER 31, 2025 (TEN YEAR SUNSET
PROVISION), AND SHALL THE COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED TO COLLECT, RETAIN AND SPEND THE FULL REVENUES FROM SUCH TAX WITHOUT
STATUTORY OR CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATION OR CONDITION, INCLUDING ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION,
SECTION 29-1-301, COLORADO REVISED STATUTES, OR ANY OTHER LAW?
Pueblo County
Official Results
Cumulative Totals
54 | P a g e
Reilly Johnson Study
55 | P a g e
56 | P a g e
57 | P a g e
58 | P a g e
59 | P a g e
Analysis of the Heroin Epidemic in Pueblo County
July 26, 2017
By:
Judy A. Solano RN, MS
Mike Nerenberg, MD
Marco Macaluso, MA
Jessica Thurman, MSW
In 2015, 489 people died from an overdose of prescription drugs or heroin in Colorado, ranking
our state with the second highest rate of misuse of these drugs in the country. “Pueblo County had the
highest age-adjusted rate of heroin-related overdose in 2013-2015 (8.7 deaths per 100,000 residents),
which was over three times the state rate. In Pueblo, over the past two years, overdose death rates have
surpassed homicides.”1
Public health concerns must be taken into account in addressing this issue in our community.
Injection drug use (IDU) is associated with high risk of blood borne infections, including human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV). Each of these viruses
can be transmitted by sharing needles, syringes, or other drug injection equipment (such as cookers, rinse
water, cotton) that were used by a person who is currently infected. In June of 2016 the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) concurred that Colorado is at risk for an increase in viral hepatitis or
HIV infections due to injection drug use. Calls to the Rocky Mountain Poison Control for exposure to
potentially infected needles increased 60 percent in Colorado from 2011 to 2015.2 It is estimated that
33% of law enforcement officials will be accidentally pricked by a needle over the course of their career.3
Department of Social Service Data
Despite the alarming effects heroin has proven to have on the community the most heart
wrenching toll it takes is on families and newborns. Parents engaging in heroin use are more likely to
demonstrate risky behaviors, maltreat their children through omissions of abuse and neglect, show poor
parental control, and have low levels of attachment to their children. Thus, children exposed to these
parenting behaviors are likely to experience emotional and behavioral problems and develop poor social
functioning.
Additionally, there is also the concern of prenatal exposure to heroin, which leads to the highly
concerning condition newborns suffer from known as Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS). NAS is a drug
withdrawal syndrome that requires hospitalization due to symptoms of excessive crying, fever, irritability,
seizures, slow weight gain, tremors, diarrhea, vomiting, and possibly even death.
Concerns over the rate of parental substance use, particularly the use of heroin has continued to
climb in Pueblo County. This is evident through the 45 percent increase from 2011 to 2016 in removal of
children from their home due to immediate concern for safety. Data from Pueblo County Department of
Social Services is not gathered on particular substances that warrant removal; however, it can be
presumed that there is a strong correlation between the numbers of children being placed outside the
home to the significant increase of heroin use found in Pueblo County. Other data found shows further
supports this assumption.
The 2015 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey completed by the Colorado Department of Health and
Human Services, found 6.3 percent of teenagers in Pueblo reported having used heroin at least one time
in their life. More than 4 percent of them were 15 years old or younger. Undeniably, the most innocent
60 | P a g e
impacted by the heroin epidemic are newborns exposed prenatally that suffer from NAS. Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment statistics show that NAS babies born in Pueblo County have
shown the drastic increase from 17 born in 2011 to 44 in 2015, a nearly 159 percent increase.
Crime/Cost Heroin
Through an analysis of the incarcerated population for the year 2016, several elements were
identified pertaining to cost of housing, length of stay, and history of charges. Overall there were a total of
1,107 identified as having an opioid heroin use, of that total a sample size of 300 were examined. The total
identified heroin use individuals account for 12% of the total population in 2016, however used 29% of the
total bed days out of the year 2016. The average length of stay for this population was 73 days, which cost
upward of 1,379,000 dollars. When this sample analysis was applied to the total population, the entire
opiate population cost $5,091,000 over the course of 2016. This cost does not include the medical care,
hospital send outs, time/staffing for proper observation and monitoring due to medical sensitivity/needs.
This cost was calculated by the average cost per day per individual at a rate of 63 dollars, which is
reasonably less compared to the state average of 82 dollars.
Using the same sample size of 300 an evaluation of criminal history and charges associated with their
incarceration were explored. Through this assessment it was identified that of the 300 heroin use
individuals 74% had a history of Failure to Appear, 50% had a history of possession charges, and 70% had a
history of non-aggravated theft shoplifting, etc. Along with the individual analysis of charges it was
identified that 35% (103/300) had a combination of possession and theft (non-aggravated) charges in their
history. Most of these individuals had multiple incarcerations in 2016, with 54% having 2 or more
incarcerations, and another 5 % having 5 or more incarcerations. Many of these individuals are
incarcerated several times over the course of year on charges that are significantly if not entirely related
their use of Opioids/Heroin. This examination of the heroin use population in the Pueblo County Jail,
shows the importance of developing an alternative to incarceration to not only save on cost but also
target the low level offenses for treatment and reduce recurrence of incarceration over a single year. 6
Solutions
Heroin is strongly associated with high rates of property crimes for income and survival but not
violent crime.3 Across our nation the law enforcement community is overwhelmed with the fallout from
the opioid epidemic. Over 30 states in the country are taking action and getting addicts into treatment
versus the expensive cycle of putting them in jail with no access to treatment. The results are
enlightening. Reductions in crime, decreased recidivism, and more success in treatment are being
evidenced by these initiatives.
LEAD
Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) started in Seattle Washington in 2011 and has grown
to over 30 states in the nation. LEAD provides immediate resources to addicts struggling with opioid and
other drug addictions. These public safety programs in which law enforcement officers redirect
persons involved in non-violent low level crimes, such as shoplifting, minor theft, and/or possession, to
community-based services instead of jail and prosecution. Participants in these programs are given
immediate access to case workers, harm reduction practices, treatment and/or social services.
Additionally, the evaluation of LEAD in Seattle showed statistically significant reductions for the
LEAD group compared to the control group on average yearly criminal justice and legal system utilization:
61 | P a g e
 Jail Bookings: LEAD participants had 1.4 fewer jail bookings
 Jail Days: LEAD group spent 39 fewer days in jail
 Incarceration: LEAD group had 87% lower odds of at least 1 prison incarceration
 Costs associated with Criminal Justice and Legal System Utilization: From pre- to post-evaluation
entry, LEAD participants showed substantial cost reductions (-$2100), whereas control
participants showed cost increases (+$5961).4
Albuquerque, New Mexico is one of those programs and has similar demographics to Pueblo. A cost
benefit analysis conducted in 2013 of 100 individuals arrested by City of Santa Fe Police for opiate
possession or sales revealed a cost of more than $4 million dollars over 3 years (2010-2012) or an average
of $42,000 per individual across local and state criminal justice and health systems. In contrast, projected
cost of a LEAD client, including intensive treatments and wrap-around services, was estimated at $34,000
per individual over 3 years.4
PAARI, Angel Program
The Police Assisted Addiction and Recovery Initiative (PAARI) is a nonprofit organization started by
Police Chief Leonard Campanello in Gloucester, Massachusetts in 2015. The mission is to support the
Gloucester Police addiction initiatives, to aid other police departments to implement similar programs,
and to foster a dialogue around the unique opportunity for police departments to take direct action
against the disease of drug addiction in their communities. Working in conjunction with the medical
community and science-based recovery programs, police departments can make a difference in their
communities by saving lives from drug overdoses, reducing the number of drug addicts and opioid drug
demand, thereby devaluing a seemingly endless drug supply. PAARI was started to support local police
departments as they worked with opioid addicts. Rather than arrest those with drug addiction problems,
PAARI allowed police departments to:
 Encourage opioid drug users to seek recovery

 Help distribute life saving opioid blocking drugs to prevent and treat overdoses
 Connect addicts with treatment programs and facilities
 Provide resources to other police departments and communities that want to do more to fight the
opioid addiction epidemic
PAARI also focuses on the removal of the stigma associated with drug addiction, turning the
conversation toward the disease of addiction rather than the crime of addiction. They work directly with
treatment centers to secure scholarships and fully-funded in-patient programs for addicts while working
with police departments, pharmacies, and families to put nasal Narcan into as many hands as possible,
recognizing that while it is not a panacea, Narcan can save the life of an overdose patient and give that
person another opportunity to get into treatment and fight their disease.5
Second Chance Act
The U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP) funds and administers the
Second Chance Act grants. Within OJP, the Bureau of Justice Assistance awards SCA grants serving adults,
and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention awards grants serving youth. These re-entry
programs designed to reduce recidivism include educational, literacy, vocational and job placement
services; a full continuum of substance abuse treatment services; and provision of comprehensive services
upon reentry, including mental and physical health care.7
62 | P a g e
References
1. Severence, R., (2017), May 17. In Pueblo, heroin deaths top homicides. Pueblo Chieftain,
retrieved from http://www.chieftain.com/news/pueblo/in-pueblo-heroin-deaths-top-
homicides/article_15494067-5243-5f70-9b14-3999cabea549.html.
2. Heroin Response Work Group. (2017), April. Heroin in Colorado: Preliminary Assessment.
Retrieved from
https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/PW_ISVP_PDO_Heroin-in-Colorado-
2017.pdf
3. Hackett, C., Baca, A., Riley, S., (2016) May. Heroin And Related Societal Costs: National
Trends and Pueblo Specific Recommendations. Colorado State University – Pueblo.
4. LEAD, Law Enforcment Assisted Diversion Program, website 2017.
5. PAARI, The Police Assisted Addiction and Recovery Initiative website 2017.
6. Macaluso, M., (2017). Pueblo County Detention Center data.
7. Families Against Mandatory Minimums, (2017). Retrieved from http://famm.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/08/FAQ-Second-Chance-Act-5.4.pdf
8. Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2014). Parental substance use and the child
welfare system. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Children's Bureau
9. Hillstrom, Z. (2017), May 14. Foster kids: Major jump due to heroin epidemic.
10. Pueblo Chieftain. Retrieved from: http://www.chieftain.com/news/pueblo/foster-kids
major-jump-due-to-heroin-epidemic/article_91d48bb8-6af6-5ab6-a356
e08c5bd35ed2.html
11. Hillstorm, Z. (2017) April 15. Number of babies coming into the world dependent
upon narcotics continues to grow. Pueblo Chieftain. Retrieved from:
http://www.chieftain.com/news/pueblo/number-of-babies-coming-into-the-world
dependent-upon-narcotics/article_730293ac-e5f4-5b8a-8823-966f1c9d823e.html
63 | P a g e
Crime/Cost Heroin Report
Through an analysis of the incarcerated population for the year 2016 several elements were identified
pertaining to cost of housing, length of stay, and history of charges. Overall there were a total of
1,107 individuals identified as having an opioid heroin use, of that total a sample size of 300 were
examined. The total identified heroin use individuals account for 12% of the total population in
2016, however used 29% of the total bed days out of the year 2016. The average length of stay
for this population was 73 days, which cost upward of 1,379,000 dollars. When this sample analysis
was applied to the total population the entire opiate population cost 5,091,000 dollars over the
course of 2016. This cost does not include the medical care, hospital send outs, time/staffing for
proper observation and monitoring due to medical sensitivity/needs. This cost was calculated by the
average cost per day per individual at a rate of 63 dollars, which is reasonably less compared to the
state average of 82 dollars.
Using the same sample size of 300 an evaluation of criminal history and charges associated with
their incarceration were explored. Through this assessment it was identified that of the 300 heroin
use individuals 74% had a history of Failure to Appear, 50% had a history of possession
charges, and 70% had a history of non-aggravated theft shoplifting, etc. Along with the
individual analysis of charges it was identified that 35% (103/300) had a combination of possession
and theft (non-aggravated) charges in their history. Most of these individuals had multiple
incarcerations in 2016, with 54% having 2 or more incarcerations, and another 5 % having 5 or more
incarcerations. Many of these individuals are incarcerated several times over the course of one year
on charges that are significantly if not entirely related to their use of Opioids/Heroin. This
examination of the heroin use population in the Pueblo County Jail, shows the importance of
developing an alternative to incarceration to not only save on cost but also to target the low level
offenses for treatment and reduce the reoccurrence of incarcerations with this population.
Submitted by Marco Macaluso,

Jail Based Behavior Services Coordinator
64 | P a g e
65 | P a g e
66 | P a g e
Pueblo County Jail Task Force
Building Committee: Chair Ken West, Keith Swerdfeger, Sean Tapia, and Cliff Torres
COLORADO MENTAL HEALTH INSTITUTE-BUILDING 020

General Building Description
Bldg. is 43 years old – with mostly all original systems beyond life expectancy.
 4 separate housing pods

 84 single bunks
 168 if double bunked
 Central Control and Administration in same pod
 Indoor & Outdoor Recreation Areas
 Warming Kitchen only w/ Dining Area in Central Con.
 Ample Storage
I. Building System’s Condition Report

A. Work Needed
• Site Work – Average – Minimal Work
• Foundations – Average – Work needed Minimal; mud-jacking required for stabilization,
$50,000.
• Concrete Slabs on Grade – Some heaving – Repair work will be required
• Structural Slabs – some work required
• Structural Concrete – Ok – No work required
• Masonry Veneer – Average – Some tuck pointing & repair to prevent further damage
• Interior Framing – Ok
• Exposed Metal Fabrication – Paint
• Finish Carpentry – Needs repurposed – Some replacement
• Counter Tops – Needs repurposed or replaced
• Building Insulation – Doesn’t meet current energy codes; would have to be upgraded.
• Roof – Didn’t view the State rated roof average, but with significant recent hail storms in
over the last two years; expect work needs to be done
• Door Frames & Hardware – General facility openings are probably fine but detention
hardware and controls would have to be modified to meet current code requirements.
• Security Windows – in poor condition work, if not replacement will be required
• Well Finishes – Average – Paint & touch up required
• Floor Finishes – Due to extensive heaving in some areas, floor covering repair and
replacement can be expected.
• Specialty Items (Toilet Partitions/Accessories, Displays/Signage, Lockers) – Average
condition – some work required.
• Security Electronics – Control Room, security monitoring systems, security hardware, and
surveillance systems will all have to be upgraded.
67 | P a g e
• Plumbing Systems – Average – Upgrades required to meet current ADA standards.
• HVAC Systems – Average to poor – According to previous reports, all major equipment has
exceeded its useful life expectancy. Equipment doesn’t meet current air exchange and
energy code requirements
• Fire Protection/Detention – Average – Don’t meet current code and would have to be
upgraded or replaced.
• Electrical Systems – Average – it should be expected that at a minimum lighting would
require relamping to meet current energy code. Exterior lighting probably doesn’t meet
“Dark Sky” ordinance, power distribution may need upgrading to accommodate new
equipment, and the emergency power systems may need upgrading to meet new
life/safety criteria.
• Miscellaneous – ADA Handicap Ramp required; kitchen equipment only provide warming
capability, one cell has to be converted into an ingress/egress sally port.
B. Potential Cost to Prepare for Facility Occupancy

Based upon the committee’s overall review of Building 020, including information provided by
CMHIP, our physical inspection, and a previous report dated October 7, 2016 by the Pueblo
County Sheriff’s Office we have arrived at the following projected costs to prepare the facility
for occupancy.
We have used historical renovation costs for these types of facilities, means cost estimating
data, and an explanation of building conditions provided by CHMIP to replacement cost to
reach our anticipated range of probable cost. Because major equipment systems must be
addressed (i.e. Heating, ventilating and air conditioning HVAC, and security systems) the cost
per square foot is significantly higher than a cosmetic renovation, therefore we offer the
following:
• Bldg. square footage: 40,392 sf
• Historical Renovation Cost Range: $100 to $120/sq. ft.
• Low Range: 40,392 sf x $100/sf = $4,039,200
• High Range: 40,392 sf x $120/sf = $4,847,040
Using the CMHIP Facility Condition Index and multiplying it times the replacement cost of a new
facility, we arrived at the following costs:
• New Facility Low and High Range Cost: $310 to $325
• Building Condition Index by CMHIP: 0.635
• (Indicating upgrade % would be 0.365)
• Low Range: 40,392 sf x $310/sf x 0.365 = $4,570,355
• High Range: 40,392 sf x $325/sf x 0.365 = $4,791,501
Conclusion
We feel confident that to bring the building up to current occupancy codes, the cost would be
between $4,000,000 and $5,000,000 at 2017 prices. It should be noted that in the 2016 Sheriff’s
report, it implied the renovation cost may be bourne by the State; however, the time and budget for
the State to perform is unknown. We anticipate these costs would ultimately be reflected in any lease
agreement between the County and the State as well. Our estimate to perform the work outlined
above would be between 9 and 12 months, and may not meet the immediate need to alleviate the
current overcrowding issue.
68 | P a g e
CMHIP Campus Map
69 | P a g e
Memo
To: Chief Mark Mears
From: Capt. Paul J. Toth
CC: Chief Darlene Alcala and Captain Dawn Ballas
Date: February 10, 2017August 30, 2017
Re: Housing Scenario – CMHIP Building 020
In August of 2016, we were tasked with surveying, researching, and producing a

feasibility study on the use of Building 020 at the Colorado Mental Health Institute of
Pueblo (CMHIP) to house inmates. My portion of this report was to explore the use of
the building as a minimum security housing area.
Building 020
Built as a forensics unit, building 020 includes space for housing, minor food prep, food
service, treatment rooms, numerous offices, and both indoor and outdoor recreation
spaces. Here are some of the highlights of the building
 Housing – separated into four different

units of twenty-one (21) rooms each –
capable of housing two inmates per room
– 42 inmates per unit – for a grand total of
168 inmates – All cells are “wet” with a
toilet and sink
 Dayroom – Each housing unit

includes a large dayroom with
space for TV, phones,
visitation, and general
activities.
70 | P a g e
 Officer Stations – there is an officer station in
each unit which is enclosed and includes a
bathroom – the two stations on each side of
the building are back to back and connected to
allow passage between the two
 Food service – the food service area includes one prep area that has re-
heating equipment, a grill, and some small refrigeration – and two dining rooms
used for food service
71 | P a g e
 Offices – there are roughly twenty-
three (23) offices of varying sizes – and
include areas for medication storage
and medical exam.
 Recreation space – an indoor gym and

very large double-fenced outside yard
Potential Inmate Housing
The configuration of the building would allow for the housing of any security class up
to and including maximum levels. I believe this facility would be best used for minimum
to medium security inmates. A possible layout might look like this:
1. Municipal – (42-bed) used for sentenced municipal prisoners. Minimum

Security needed – requiring one deputy during the day and a shared
deputy at night
2. Mixed classification - Parole and other Holds - (42-bed) inmates sentenced

and pre-sentenced with a parole hold or hold for another agency –
Medium/Maximum Security needed – requiring one deputy during the day
24-hours a day
3. Medium Security GP - (42-bed) inmates sentenced and pre-sentenced

(currently housed on the 5th floor - Minimum Security needed – requiring
one deputy during the day and a shared deputy at night
4. Medium Security GP - (42-bed) inmates sentenced and pre-sentenced

(currently housed on the 5th floor - Minimum Security needed – requiring
one deputy during the day and a shared deputy at night
Pros - Main benefits to this plan – reduces the mid-level population of the main jail –
clearing the 5th floor.
Secondarily it also includes all parole holds and as a result all parole hearings could
be held at this building – reducing the weekly conflicts we currently experience with the
parole department at our main building.
The addition of a housing area for municipal prisoners eases the public concerns that
we are jeopardizing public safety and re-building the partnership with the city police
and municipal judge.
Wet cells allow for decreased staffing at night, when the inmates are locked down
Excellent perimeter security fencing
72 | P a g e
Many opportunities for off-site office space, inmate program space, and small group
meeting/training space
Cons – Many of those who would be moving would be pre-sentenced and so they
would need to be transported to court. After the new judicial building opens though,
all inmates will have to be transported to court by van or bus no matter which facility
they are in and the staff already approved for the new judicial building transport section
could easily handle this added stop on their route.
Staffing also is problematic with this building because it requires a complete new staff.
Medical costs would also increase because at minimum a 24-hour medical staff
member would be needed at this facility to ensure proper medical care.
Food costs – possible increased food costs – potential exists to explore a contract with
the CMHIP kitchen for food service
Line Item and Capital Equipment Factors
Medical – Our contractor CHC recommends having one RN position 24-hours per day
to have the capability of dealing with such a varied population. One 24-hour per day
medical staff member – CHC quoted a price of $362,000 (estimate not a formal quote)
Kitchen – The cost of transporting food to the new facility will add approximately
$201,655 annually (estimate not a formal quote) to the cost of our contract with Trinity.
We may also be able to explore a new contract with the food service group at CMHIP.
Both of these options would have to be negotiated with the respective agencies to
establish actual cost factors. There may some additional costs for food service
equipment depending on the contract and style of food being served.
Visitation and Phones – Adding this new building to the new visitation system and
the addition of the new phones would necessitate purchasing the equipment –
estimated at $7,000 each machine – minimum of four machines - $28,000
Equipment and Supplies – A rough estimate of the new equipment needed would
include:
 Five new PCs and printers ($7500)
 Expansion of the Guard 1 system ($3700)
 Office Supplies – Estimate a 20% increase ($9,800)
 Operating Supplies – 20% increase ($13,400)
 Inmate supplies – 20% increase ($18,000)
Rent – The new rent at this building would be $268,321.16 – This number could be
reduced through the efforts of Sheriff Taylor and members of the state House of
Representatives
73 | P a g e
Furniture– Beds ($374ea X 164 beds = $61,336)
Chairs ($114ea X 60 chairs = $6,840)
Potential Revenue -
 Pueblo Municipal Prisoners Unit
o Up to 42 inmates – with a probable average population of 32 @ $45

per day - $1440 per day $525,600 annual Estimate
 Colorado Department of Corrections
o DOC Sentence Holds
 Up to 15 inmates – with a probable average population of 10

@ $51.45 per day - $514.50 per day $187,792 annual
Estimate
o Parole Holds
 Up to 20 inmates – with a probable average population of 15

@ $51.45 per day - $771.75 per day $281,688 annual
Estimate
Potential Annual Revenue Totals
Pueblo – $525,600
DOC – $469,480
Total - $995,080
74 | P a g e
Staffing
This building could be staffed as follows:
Supervision Entry Point Municipal DOC/FED Unit 3 Unit 4

Unit Holds PCDF PCDF
Day Sgt 7a-3p 7a-3p 7a-3p 7a-3p 7a-3p
Swings Sgt 3p-11p 3p-11p 3p-11p 3p-11p 3p-11p
Graves Sgt None 11p-7a 11p-7a None 11p-7a
The new Captain and Lieutenant over Judicial can also oversee this building
Annual Cost Summary

Staffing $ 1,984,775
Rent $ 268,321
Furniture $ 107,312
Medical $ 388,892
Kitchen $ 230,544
Visitation $ 52,000
Misc supplies $ 75,957
__________
Total Annual Cost estimate $ 3,107,801
Possible Revenue Summary

City of Pueblo $ 525,600
DOC Inmates $ 187,792
Parole $ 281,688
__________
Total Revenue Estimate $ 995,080
Adjusted minimal cost to Pueblo County $2,112,721
75 | P a g e
PUEBLO COUNTY JAIL-ADDITION & RENOVATION
General Building Description

The Tower is 38 years old and has 189 single bunks. The Dorms are 11 years old and have 4 separate sections
for 80 inmates per section, with an occupancy of 320 inmates. The Tower holds Master Control and
Administration. Also in Tower are Property and Laundry (1st floor), the Medical Wing (2nd floor), and the
Outdoor Recreation Area (5th floor). There is a full commercial kitchen in the Dorms.
I. Tower - Building System’s Condition Report

The Tower Building System’s Condition is rated as work needed, minimal work needed, and no work
needed with the following items:
A. Work Needed
• structural slabs
• door frames and hardware (general facility openings are ok)
-detention hardware and controls (modified to meet current code requirements)
-change electro/mechanical locks with solenoid locks
• security windows
-in poor condition and need work
-replaced with polycarbonate
-metal stops replaced-rusted out
B. Minimal Work Needed

• site work
• foundation
• block(painting)
• exposed metal fabrication-metal ceiling needs replaced, paint shower area
• finish carpentry
• roof system
• well finishes (paint and touch up)
• floor finishes (Terrazo)
• specialty items (toilet partitions and accessories, displays and signage, lockers, toilet and sink
combos exceeded life replacement)
• plumbing systems (need to meet current ADA standards, replace cracked vent and waste
pipes, replace 2 independent hot water tanks, 1,000 gallons)
• HVAC systems (replace pipe in recirc line, replace reheat coils/VAV and pneumatic to DDC
controls)
• fire protection/detention (update or replace to meet current codes, update sensors, horns,
strobes)
76 | P a g e
• electrical systems (replace cell light fixtures to higher security)
• miscellaneous (ADA handicap ramp required, kitchen equipment would only provide warming
capability, one cell would have to be converted in to an ingress/egress sally port, front East
entrance ramp, 5th floor rec yard ramp, boiler stack needs replacement, hot water pumps 3 &
4 and shut off valves are 38 years old)
C. No Work Needed
• structural concrete
• interior framing
• security electronics
II. Dorms – Building System’s Condition Report

The Dorm’s Building System’s Condition is rated as work needed, minimal work needed, and no work
needed with the following items:
A. Work Needed
• exposed metal fabrication(paint)
• counter tops (replace all non-institutional cabinets with prison cabinets)
B. Minimal Work Needed

• site work
• foundation
• masonry veneer
• door frames and hardware (general facility openings are fine but detention hardware and
controls need updated to current code requirements
• security windows (bars and wire mesh glass)
• well finishes (paint and touch up)
• floor finishes (kitchen floor replacement)
• specialty items (toilet partitions/accessories, displays/signage, lockers, 20 interior doors
replaced)
• plumbing systems (install water shut offs at floor level with security doors)
• HVAC system (RTU’s are at ½ life expectancy)
• fire protection/detention (simplex update correct locations on zones)
• electrical systems (relamping to meet minimum lighting energy code-LED)
• miscellaneous (add second level to dorms, kitchen ceiling tile replacement)
C. No Work Needed
• structural concrete
• interior framing
Potential Cost to Remodel and Add to Current Facility

Based upon the committee’s overall review of the tower and dorm, including information provided by the
Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office and our physical inspection, we have arrived at the following projected costs
to prepare the facility for occupancy.
We have used historical renovation costs for these types of facilities, means cost estimating data, and an
explanation of building condition to reach our anticipated range of probable cost. Because major equipment
systems must be addressed (i.e. heating, ventilating and air conditioning HVAC, and security systems) the
cost per square foot is significantly higher than a cosmetic renovation, therefore we offer the following:
77 | P a g e
Tower square footage: 70,652 sf
Cost of Remodel the Tower: $150 to $250/sq. ft.
Low Range: 70,652 sf x $150/sf $10,597,800
High Range: 70,652 sf x $250/sf $17,663,000
Dorms square footage: 51,110 sf

Cost to Remodel the Dorms: $100 to $200/sq. ft.
Low Range: 51,110 sf x $100/sf $5,111,000
High Range: 51,110 sf x $200/sf $10,222,000
Cost to Add on Top of the Dorms: $330/sq. ft.

51,110 sf x $330/sf $16,866,300
Cost to Buy Surrounding Land

Total Site Cost: $1,664,708
Assessor’s Value Total: $590,567 x 125% $738,208
Repurposed Site: 46,325 x $20/sf $926,500
Cost to Build a Secondary Roof over the Towers: $350,000

_______________________________________________________________
Low Subtotal Construction Costs: $34,589,808
High Subtotal Construction Costs: $46,766,008
Professional Services @ 8%:

Low Range: $34,589,808 x 8% $2,767,184
High Range: $46,766,008 x 8% $3,741,280
_______________________________________________________________
Low Range Subtotal Costs: $37,356,992
High Range Subtotal Costs: $50,507,288
Contingency @ 10%:
Low Range: $37,356,992 x 10% $3,735,699
High Range: $50,507,288 x 10% $5,050,728
_______________________________________________________________
Low Range Total including Contingency: $41,092,691
High Range Total including Contingency: $55,558,016
Conclusion
We feel confident that to bring the building up to current occupancy codes, the cost would be between
$42,000,000 and $56,000,000 at 2017 prices. Our estimate to perform the work outlined above would be
between 12 and 24 months, and may not meet the immediate need to alleviate the current overcrowding
issue. The addition of wet cells above the dorms could be completed without having to move any inmates,
saving on transportation and housing costs. Once completed, the tower could be vacated and renovation of
the floors could be completed.
We believe this renovation and addition would allow for 759 inmate population; 189 tower, 320 dorm,
250 wet cell 2nd floor dorm; however, a few cells would likely be lost in the Tower when they are upgraded
to be ADA accessible. This most likely would not allow for future expansion.
78 | P a g e
Staff Letter_18 August 2017
79 | P a g e
NEW JAIL PHASED APPROACH

Building Description
To move into a new jail, while allowing a phased approach, steps will be identical to the process for
designing and building a completely new jail. Steps include: procuring a site, preparing the site, full
layout and planning for most - if not all future build out.
The phased approach could provide:

(1) 30,000 sf. for Sheriff’s Administration / Visitor and Booking / Intake
(2) 65,000 sf. pods mezzanine style, single story jail cells holding 250 inmates each
and (1) 13,000 sf. for Infirmary / Kitchen / Laundry
I. Building System’s Condition Report

A. Work Needed
 Site Selection
 Site Procurement
 Site Preparation
- Including all utility upgrades
• Building layout and construction of phase 1
- Including site fencing
• Site parking
• All new construction allowing for immediate use of 50% of future build out
• Construction envisioned as pre-cast concrete tilt-up panels w/ pre-cast concrete roof
and slabs on grade floor
II. Potential Cost to Phased Approach

Utilizing the Reilly Johnson Architecture cost estimate from 06/29/2015 and using historical
renovation costs for these types of facilities, means cost estimating data, and an explanation of
building condition to reach our anticipated range of probable cost.
Site Acquisition: $3,045,000

Remote location – TBD
Site Work (allow $18/sf on 272,000 sf of new bldg.): $4,896,000

Demolish and haul
Parking lot paving, curb & gutter
Earthwork/grading/landscaping and irrigation/pole mounted lighting
80 | P a g e
New on-site asphalt roadways and parking, concrete curb & gutter, and concrete sidewalks
New underground utilities: domestic water, fire lines, sanitary sewer, fire hydrants, storm
sewer
Public Lobby /Detention Offices/Detention Staff Services: $9,750,000

30,000 gsf in a 1 story building @ $325/gsf
500 Bed Detention Ctr. w/ Infirmary/Kitchen/Laundry: $53,625,000

143,000 gsf total @ $375/gsf
1 story w/ mezzanine
_______________________________________________________________
Subtotal Construction Costs: $71,316,000
*Professional Services from original Reilly Johnson estimate: $10,407,200

Architect/Engineer (inc. Reimbursable Expenses) 9,728,600
Surveying + Geotechnical Investigations 30,000
Materials Testing during Construction 648,600
*w/ understanding that phased design has approximate cost potentially 3% higher
_______________________________________________________________
Subtotal Costs: $81,723,200
Contingency @ 10%: $8,172,320
_______________________________________________________________
Total including Contingency: $89,895,520
Conclusion
Although phased approach allows for a new construction direction, it would require a split
campus and has no allowance for renovation or maintenance of the existing facility, which
would continue to be in operation until final build out.
81 | P a g e
NEW JAIL AT PUEBLOPLEX - THE ARMY DEPOT SITE
Building Description
Although several large 90,000 sf warehouses exist, they are not EPA remediated to a housing
standard and will likely never be. Therefore, the only option would be to build a new 200,000 sf jail
facility. Although land cost may be negotiated, significant cost will be incurred.
A. Work Needed
◦ Site Selection – N/A @ Pueblo Plex
◦ Site Procurement – N/A Negotiated
◦ Site Preparation
• Including all utility upgrades
• No large scale water or domestic water exists
o 300 ac ft of water exists. Water cisterns would be required
◦ Building layout and construction

• Including site fencing
◦ Site parking – N/A Parking already exists
◦ All new construction allowing for immediate use

• Construction envisioned as pre-cast concrete tilt-up panels w/ pre-cast concrete roof and
slabs on grade floor
Potential Cost
Utilizing the Reilly Johnson Architecture cost estimate from 06/29/2015 and using historical
renovation costs for these types of facilities, means cost estimating data, and an explanation of
building condition to reach our anticipated range of probable cost.
Site Acquisition: N/A
Site Work:
Water Treatment Plant “Sewer” $29,000,000
Earthwork/grading/landscaping and irrigation/pole $2,000,000
mounted lighting
Domestic Water Extension & Cistern $700,000
New on-site asphalt roadways, concrete curb & gutter, and concrete sidewalks
82 | P a g e
Public Lobby /Detention Offices/Detention Staff Services: $9,750,000
30,000 gsf in a 1 story building @ $325/gsf
1000 Bed Detention Ctr. w/ Infirmary/Kitchen/Laundry: $107,250,000

286,000 gsf total @ $375/gsf
1 story w/ mezzanine
_______________________________________________________________
Subtotal Construction Costs: $148,700,000
*Professional Services from original Reilly Johnson estimate: $10,407,200

Architect/Engineer (inc. Reimbursable Expenses) 9,728,600
Surveying + Geotechnical Investigations 30,000
Materials Testing during Construction 648,600
*w/ understanding that phased design has approximate cost potentially 3% higher
_______________________________________________________________
Subtotal Costs: $159,107,200
Contingency @ 10%: $15,910,720
_______________________________________________________________
Total including Contingency: $175,017,920
Conclusion
With required infrastructure and significant distance, this option does not seem feasible.
83 | P a g e
Transportation Study_7-mile Radius
84 | P a g e
Transportation Study_Centennial South Penitentiary II
50
85 | P a g e
Transportation Study_Huerfano County Correctional Center
86 | P a g e
Jail Task Force Letter of Support
I am writing in support of the Treatment Center as a crucial part of the Jail replacement plan.
As has been well documented, mental health patients and low-level drug offenders constitute a large
portion of our overcrowded jail population. It is also clear that jail is not the most appropriate or effective
place for those populations. The Treatment Center is a wonderful opportunity to unclog our jail, and our
court system (which could further unclog our jail) in a more effective and cost-efficient manner than is
currently being done.
Data is accumulating that diverting people from jail into services and treatment is more effective for those
people, and cheaper for “the system,” than jailing them. In addition, a purposeful attempt to transition
people from jail back into the community, which would be done through this center, has also been shown
to work better than just releasing people without any interventions or plans.
Collecting all addiction and mental health related support services in one location would clearly make them
easier to access and navigate, improving the lives of those needing those services and improving our
community.
Repurposing a large space like the dormitories is a great opportunity to move ahead with what is increasingly
being recognized as a necessary change in direction in how we deal with the drug/mental health crises in
our community and region.
Michael Nerenberg MD
87 | P a g e
88 | P a g e
89 | P a g e

Pueblo County Jail Task Force 2017 Comprehensive Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pueblo County Jail Task Force 2017 Comprehensive Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PUEBLO COUNTY

JAIL TASK FORCE

August 30, 2017

Task Force Members

(Prepared by the Pueblo County Attorney’s Office)

Lawsuit Challenges Appalling Conditions at Suffolk County (NY) Jails

§ 30-11-104. County Buildings--acquisition of land or buildings by eminent domain authorized

Jail Task Force Sub-Committees

Building Site Selection

Detention Center “Jail” History

PCSO Detention Facility Mission

500 ___ Design

160% ___ Design

PCSO Detention Overtime Hours History

CUSTOMER SERVICE REQUESTS (WORK ORDERS)

2014 $849,724 2019 (Estimate) $1,700,304

Totals from 2014 – 2024 (Estimate) $14,677,932

Crumbling Walls Cracked Pipes Exterior Cracks

(Statistics provided by Pueblo County Facilities Department)

Reilly Johnson Architecture

National & Pueblo County Jail Statistics

If a new county jail were to be constructed, the Work

Does the program work?

Goals and Benefits of the Proposed Treatment Center

Outdated Control Room

Financials Considerations Outdated Locks

Starting Capital Costs On-Going Costs

Centennial South Penitentiary Campus (CSP II)

Huerfano County Correctional Center

Option 4 – Other CMHIP Buildings

Some of these considerations include:

HOK will create:

The HOK report will include:

Horizontal versus Vertical

TOTAL - $42-56m TOTAL - $2,270,913m

Starting Capital Costs On-Going Costs

*Personnel, operational and other

Starting Capital Costs On-Going Costs

Not Available for cuts:

Tax Incentive Refunds $58.4

General Obligation Bond

April 12 News Release_Inmate Attack ........................................................................................................ 51

"My biggest fear is to have one of my employees get injured or having

BALLOT ISSUE NO. 1A:

 Encourage opioid drug users to seek recovery

Second Chance Act

Submitted by Marco Macaluso,

COLORADO MENTAL HEALTH INSTITUTE-BUILDING 020

 4 separate housing pods

I. Building System’s Condition Report

B. Potential Cost to Prepare for Facility Occupancy

In August of 2016, we were tasked with surveying, researching, and producing a

 Housing – separated into four different

 Dayroom – Each housing unit

 Recreation space – an indoor gym and

Potential Inmate Housing

1. Municipal – (42-bed) used for sentenced municipal prisoners. Minimum

2. Mixed classification - Parole and other Holds - (42-bed) inmates sentenced

3. Medium Security GP - (42-bed) inmates sentenced and pre-sentenced

4. Medium Security GP - (42-bed) inmates sentenced and pre-sentenced

Excellent perimeter security fencing

Line Item and Capital Equipment Factors

 Five new PCs and printers ($7500)

 Expansion of the Guard 1 system ($3700)