Thread by @DanDocumenter

Hi, I'll be live-tweeting today's Justice Center Executive Steering Committee meeting beginning at 10:00 am for #CLEdocumenters
@cledocumenters
@NeighborUpCle

You can watch the meeting live on the county‘s Youtube channel:
youtube.com/c/cuyahogacoun…

Here is a link to the full meeting agenda. I will post the relevant portions of the agenda as items are discussed.
cuyahogacounty.us/docs/default-s…

A little background on the Justice Center Executive Steering Committee: it was convened in March 2019 in connection to the county‘s announced plans to renovate or replace the county-owned Justice Center in downtown Cleveland.

The Justice Center houses the county‘s court of common pleas, Cleveland‘s municipal courts, as well as the county‘s jail, prosecutor‘s offices, and Cleveland‘s police headquarters.

The steering committee is made up of stakeholders, who "meet to gain updates from the project team, provide feedback, and make critical determinations for the future of the Corrections Center“ per the county‘s website.

In March 2021, the committee posted a presentation giving an overview of the project and its planning process. It was hosted by Jeff Appelbaum, the project manager, and two project consultants, Andy Cupples and Curtiss Pulitzer.

More information, including links to past presentations and meeting agendas from the committee can be found here:
cuyahogacounty.us/publicworks/pr…

Over the weekend, @njKaitlinDurbin filed a story for @clevelanddotcom looking back at the committee‘s work over the past three years. The major points of discussion has revolved around the new jail: its capacity, its design, and its location.
cleveland.com/news/2022/04/b…

The committe recently announced its preferred site for a new jail. The site at 2700 Transport Rd. preferred by the committee sits downhill from the US Post Office‘s Orange Ave headquarters adjacent to the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority‘s rapid tracks.

The preferred site actually deals with three parcels of land owned by UTS Realty LLC. It currently serves as a container storage-yard.

The main purpose of today‘s committee meeting is to consider going forward with the acquisition of this site for the new jail. That decision is contingent environmental concerns and the property‘s price.

The agenda includes time for an executive session for this consideration. Afterward the comittee will allow public comment on its determination and further public discussion of the matter before taking a planned vote.

As worded on the agenda, the determination would not foreclose the county from pursuing alternative sites in the future. As noted, selection of the site also depends on environmental concerns.

@CourtneyAstolfi reported for @clevelandotcom that the 44-acre site under consideration would require environmental clean-up before construction could occur. cleveland.com/news/2022/04/p…

In the 1980s, the site was a preferred site for a planned state prison, but concerns over the cost of an environmental cleanup halted those plans, reported @njKaitlinDurbin for @clevelanddotcom yesterday.
cleveland.com/news/2022/04/o…

In 2006, UTS Realty LLC acquired the property listed at 2700 Transport Rd. from United Truck and Car Wash for $510,000, according to county records. Per tax records, the county valued this 4.35 acre parcel at $536,900 in 2021.

UTS Realty LLC also owns the abutting property listed at 2730 Transport Rd. It was purchased from BP America Inc. in 2005 for $1.7 million.

In 2018 UTS Realty LLC filed a complaint with the Board of Revisions over the property‘s valuation at 2700 Transport Rd. and adjacent properties, arguing for significantly higher valuations.

According to Ohio Secretary of State records, UTS Realty LLC registered in Ohio in 2005. It was formed as a Michigan LLC in 2003, per the records.
bizimage.ohiosos.gov/api/image/pdf/…

In 2016, per Ohio Secretary of State records, UTS Realty LLC updated its agent from CT Corpaoration Systems (1300 E. 9th St., Cleveland, OH) to Corporate Creations Network Inc. (119 E. Court St., Cincinnati, OH).
bizimage.ohiosos.gov/api/image/pdf/…

The meeting is called to order at 10:06 am. All 12 members of the committee are present.

"We have a lot of people here, who have a public comment," said Jeff Appelbaum, the project's manager, who is running the meeting. "We're going to do all of the public comment first and get it out of the way," he said. The comments will come before the executive session.

After the executive session, the committee will have a discussion of the determination. If there are additional public comments, they can be given at that time, as well, said Appelbaum.

"This is important work, it is critical that we determine that location," said Cuyahoga County Council President Pernel Jones, Jr. about the jail site. He noted that the design must be "rooted in criminal justice reform," caling it "a brand new start."

Jones, Jr., said that he would not support an alternative jail site in Slavic Village. Appelbaum said that the site on the agenda today does not deal with that alternative site.

The Slavic Village site has been subject of controversy, as reported by @njKaitlinDurbin

A link to that story. cleveland.com/news/2022/02/s…

"I don't see any residents up here," said Brenda. She said that the committee must include the public in the process. She said that this issue was personal to here, noting she had a niece, Ralkina Jones, die in the Cleveland Heights city jail.

"I urge you to put the welfare of those most affected... as your highest prority," said Laurie Albright, discussing the jail's future residents and workers. Albright said that committee should reconsider the location of the jail, noting the environmental contimination of the site

Starting construction during high construction costs due to supply-chain issues seems "imprudent at best," said Albright.

"The people are here, residents are here, working folks, mothers, directly impacted folks, clergy like myself," said one public commenter. "If you want to build something, build care, buld treatment," he said.

"If we are serious about keeping our community's safe, we must acknowledge the violence that takes place inside our jails echoes and reverberates just as loud as the violence outside," said Mr. O'Reily, sharing stories of horrible abuse against incarcerated people at the jail.

"Let's talk about what that money could buy," said one public commenter about the half-billion dollars budgeted for the project. She said that the money could be spent on education or "wrap-around public defense" or "prevention strategies" or "public housing."

"You can not heal in the place that broke you," she said about treatment options offered in the context of incarceration, noting the coercive nature of the services and the "threat" of reincarceration.

"Would you put a school in the middle of a toxic brownfield," said Chrissy Stonebraker-Martinez about the severe toxins present on the property once used as a fuel refinery. "It is a mistake to build anything on this land," she said.

"I ask you to please vote no," said Stonebraker-Martinez.

"I am concerned that this whole jail project is a huge amount of tax-payer money, and it is your responsibility to think about how dear this money is to us, your constituents," said Marc Alvarado, noting that "the county has a very bad reputation of going over-budget."

Jeremy Koosed said he was against the site, citing its proximity to polluting industry and its inaccessibility "with only one road in-and-out."

"Cuyahoga County could certainly use more," said Stephanie Thomas of the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless about the need for permanent supportive housing, noting that there are months-long wait lists. "Put it towards housing for the people," said Thomas about jail funds.

"The overall effect of imprisonment is null," said Keith Wilson referring to a U. of Chicago study about the recidivism rate of incarceration when compared to other sanctions. "Your paving the road to bad decisions for these lawmakers," said Wilson about building a new jail.

"I believe what we are witnessing here is the old way of governing: throwing money at the problem," said Kareem Henton, "A new building will make defense attorneys jobs harder by separating the jail from the courts," he said.

"It's irresponsible to invest in a jail with increased capactiy," Henton said, "you will be compelled to fill it, I guarantee it."

"We have to go all the way back to the root causes of why we're putting people inside that jail," said Fred Barkley.

"I am here, becaues I know there is a better way forward," said Josiah Quarle. He said that the 23-hour lock-ups faced by children at the juvenille detention center is "torture." He said to oppose purchasing a "toxic site to warehouse our families."

Tiana Bohanon said that building a new jail would not solve the "persistent, unconstitutional violations that are happening inside the jail today" She said was wrong to spend $550 million to imprison people suffering"from joblessenss, poverty, and a lack of education."

"It was a mess in there," said James about the county jail 30 years ."My family has been ravished by this prison system," she said. "We need a whole bunch of other things done in the prisons besides building a new one," she said, talking about "corrupt" staff in the prisons.

"We are going to make sure that people are recognized as the most important factor," said Tariq K. Shabazz, candidate for county executive, talking about funding economic development and support services. "I vehemently oppose any construction of a new facility," he said.

"The people from Cleveland, where this thing is going," said Mr. Walker, "Listen to them." he said, addressing folks on the committee, who are not from Cleveland, to listen to folks who are from Cleveland. "Every issue that they mentioned, don't let this fall on deaf ears."

"I urge us all to remember that development is not a neutral term," said Melendez, talking about housing development forcing people "out of their houses and into jails." She said "jailing people is a temporary band-aid solution to larger structural problems," she said.

A motion is made to go to executive session to consider acquisition of property for public purpose. It is approved unanimously. The committee enters executive session. After the session there will be time for additional discussion, said Appelbaum.

Many public commenters today represented the Cuyahoga County Jail Coalition. Here is some more info about the coalition, from their website. sites.google.com/view/jailcoali…

While the executive session goes on... A 2014 study said a new jail should have 2,600 beds. But in Sept. 2019, the committee determined that the new jail should have between 1,600 to 2,400 beds, with a target population of 1,350 -- below the jail's capacity -- said Appelbaum.

These slides are coming from the March 2021 presentation again linked below...

Diversion is a buzzword at today's meeting. In March 2021, Pulitzer said that "there propbably are 100 or plus more individuals in the facility there, for serious mental ilness or mental ilness with addiction problems that really could be diverted out of the jail."

That conversation revolved around the necessity of the Cuyahoga County Diversion Center that opened in May 2021.
adamhscc.org/about-us/curre…

Some commenters brought up renovating the old jail downtown. Since Nov. 2020, the committee determined that renovating the downtown jail was "impractical" and that a site outside of downtown should be sought to establish a new campus-like facility, said Appelbaum in March 2021.

Pulitzer outlined the key components of what a new jail facility would look like during the March 2021 meeting. He spoke about the different types of housing and the clusters of housing pods, including mental-health specific pods.

The proposed jail would be ~780,000 sq. ft, said Pulitzer during the March 2021 meeting. Here is a rendering of an envisioned layout.

Here is a second rendering of an envisioned layout. This would be a multi-story structure, "the size of a three-story office building" said Cupples.

If you're interested in how the committee planned to move forward with site selection since March 2021, Appelbaum breaks down the committees planned steps at around 42:00. Today we're somewhere on the spectrum of steps 5 and 7.

This slide is interesting, as one of the issues it raises is accesibility by public transit. The site discussed today is close to the E. 34 St. rapid stop, servicing the red/blue/green lines. But as oriented, it's quite a hike up and down the hill. Same with the buses on Broadway

Here is a map for reference.

Update on today's meeting: the committee has been in executive session now for over an hour.

Just shy of the two-hour mark, it sounds like the committee is returning from executive session.

A motion is moved to return from executive session, the motion passes without opposition.

"We don't want to extend the day for you," said Jeff Appelbaum. He will ask to move to adjourn. He said that the discussion is not finished, so they are asking for a date to reconvene. At that future meeting, the committee will re-enter executive session to finsih discussions

"The public really needs to be involved in this process," said one member of the public. "This is about the 15th or 16th steering committee meeting, and everyone of these meetings is public," said Appelbaum noting that the meetings are on the county's website.

There is a lot of back-and-forth between members of the public in the audience and Appelbaum. Applebaum said that the process is governed by an MOU, and the members of the committee are all elected officials with fiduciary duties.

This was in response to a comment from the public about the lack of community-members on the committee as opposed to elected officials.

"You can disagree with the proces," said Appelbaum "It's a public process." Amid protest from the public, a member of the committee moved to adjourn the meeting. A second was made. And enough ayes were given to end the meeting.

"You're all welcome back for our next session," said Appelbaum before the meeting adjourned amid continued protest. "I don't have the date for the next meeting, we're going to set that up as quickly as we can," he said.

Unfortunately, it was unclear who made the motion, who seconded, and who voted in favor, based on the live-stream. But you can hear the end of the meeting as described in the last minute of the recording.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:23 pm.

So in conclusion, after lengthy public comment, the committee entered executive session. After two hours, they returned. They had not reached a decision whether to move forward with the site at 2700 Transport Rd, citing the need for more discussion.

The plan is to reconvene the commitee at a future date. The committee will re-enter executive session to continue deliberations, before a vote. Further, a presentation will be given to respond to issues raised by the public at today's meeting.

This concludes today's Justice Center Executive Steering Committee meeting. The next meeting is not yet scheduled. For more meeting coverage, check out documenters.org.

Have questions? Think we got something wrong? Send any inquiries on the meeting or these tweets to
@cledocumenters
Or email us at [e-mail]