Gazette File Photo

HOUGHTON – County voters turned out Tuesday to decide three millage proposals and one millage renewal. Two of the referendums passed while two failed. Among them, the Houghton County Jail and County Building Improvement Bond Proposal met with failure – but, not by much. The proposal was defeated by 972 votes, with 3,629 voting to 4,601, losing by just over 30%. The proposal sought 1.6 mills to allow the county borrow up to $32 million for jail and county building improvements.

Houghton County Board of Commissioners Chairman Tom Tikkanen said going into the election, he was not sure of the outcome. “You never really know how things are going to go,” he said, “especially with jail millages. Those are always unpopular. That’s not exclusive to Houghton County.”

Tikkanen said that while the proposal failed, he continues to be optimistic. “It’s a well thought-out plan,” he said. “It’s not penny wise and pound foolish; it has features integrated that will allow future use for the next couple of generations here in Houghton County.”

The proposal met with criticism because it was placed on the August ballot, said Tikkanen. “But the fact of the matter is that’s not unusual.”

Tikkanen admitted that Tuesday’s was a crowded ballot with four different proposals and there were concerns over the jail proposal being among them.

“Our whole approach was to keep this in the forefront of the residents’ minds, so that they … somehow or another they would know this one wasn’t a fast one that snuck up on them.”

Looking at things optimistically, he said, it should not be overlooked that more than 30% of the voters supported the jail millage. While it isn’t a win, he said, it is a step in the right direction for those who support a new facilty.

County officials have advocated for a new facility since the Upper Peninsula Commission for Area Progress (UPCAP) released a U.P. Regional Jail and Facility Re-Use Study in January, 2010. That study showed the county jail does not comply with current Michigan Department of Correction standards, and poses serious liabilities to the county. Among the main issues with the current jail, built in 1962-63, which can house up to 28 inmates, it is now too small.

A 2010 millage for a $15 million complex including 110 beds, a district court and sheriff’s department was soundly defeated.

In the fall of 2018, voters narrowly rejected an $11 million proposal for a 55-bed addition behind the courthouse, with work camp beds relocated to the former jail space, which included closing the work camp, located at the airport.

Inadequate space at the current jail has been increasing over the years. The jail was built in 1962 and over time, legislative actions have expanded criminal laws, creating more instances of arrest. At a special meeting of the County Board in April, part of the discussion focused on the fact that the jail is not in compliance with current Michigan Dept. of Corrections (MDOC) regulations and jail standards, leaving the county vulnerable to actions and the risk of the federal government closing the jail.

Additionally, the jail’s deficiencies also leave the county vulnerable to lawsuits filed by jail inmates, something Tikkanen said at the time happens more frequently than people know.

“It doesn’t get a lot publicity, but there are lawsuits from inmates suing the county. We’re in the midst of one right now,” Tikkanen said. “So, this is not a step from fiction, it’s a failing facility. That’s why they build new schools once in a while.”

The question of whether the same or a similar proposal will appear on the November ballot, said Tikkanen, will be discussed at the next County Board meeting.

Tikkanen said while there is always support for education, as well as the elderly community members, he believes people will understand that community standards do extend to a safe and secure jail facility. “Not only for the people who are forced to be there,” he said, “but also for the workers who are dedicated to keeping the community safe.”