Vote for jail bond despite misleading language
The public is not well served by the language of the proposed $65 million jail bond on the May 13 ballot.
The proposal asks simply whether the county should issue the bond.
The wording would lead most people to conclude that if the proposal is voted down, the new jail won’t be built.
Wrong.
The new jail will be built regardless of the outcome of the vote, according to the Lancaster County Board.
The real question, board members say, is how long voters will have to pay off the bond.
A 25-year bond approved by voters would mean lower payments than a 10-year term, which the board can issue without voter approval, or an alternative financing method in which the Public Building Commission would issue a 25-year bond.
County Board members said their bond attorney rejected the idea of offering voters a choice on the grounds that it would open the door to a possible legal challenge and strongly recommended the wording used on the ballot.
The potential for confusing the voter bothered county board members. Commissioner Deb Schorr even voted against the proposal for that very reason, even though she believes passage would be in taxpayers’ best interest.
The 10-year bond would add about $64.50 to the property tax bill for a home valued at $150,000. The 25-year, voter-approved bond would add about $37.50 a year.
(It’s worth noting that, just like a home mortgage, the longer repayment period would end up costing more. The cost of the 10-year bond at an estimated 3.75 percent would be about $13 million in interest. The 25-year bond would cost about $48.4 million.)
Although some local residents have questioned the need for a new jail and suggested greater use of alternative sentencing for offenders, the Journal Star editorial board believes the new jail is needed. The county is now spending more than $1 million a year sending prisoners to other counties because the jail is overcrowded.
Overcrowding has persisted even though officials have sharply increased the use of house arrest. Currently, more than 100 individuals are wearing electronic monitors in the house arrest program.
The increase in the number of prisoners is unlikely to slow. Since the current jail was built 16 years ago, the population of the county has increased almost 25 percent.
The new jail site on West O Street, which already has been purchased, will allow for future expansion of the jail, something that is not possible at the current site.
On balance, after weighing the pros and cons of the proposed bond issue, the Journal Star is swayed most by the desire to keep the local property tax rate low. The editorial board recommends a vote in favor of the jail bond, even if you have to hold your nose while doing it.
The proposal asks simply whether the county should issue the bond.
The wording would lead most people to conclude that if the proposal is voted down, the new jail won’t be built.
Wrong.
The new jail will be built regardless of the outcome of the vote, according to the Lancaster County Board.
The real question, board members say, is how long voters will have to pay off the bond.
A 25-year bond approved by voters would mean lower payments than a 10-year term, which the board can issue without voter approval, or an alternative financing method in which the Public Building Commission would issue a 25-year bond.
County Board members said their bond attorney rejected the idea of offering voters a choice on the grounds that it would open the door to a possible legal challenge and strongly recommended the wording used on the ballot.
The potential for confusing the voter bothered county board members. Commissioner Deb Schorr even voted against the proposal for that very reason, even though she believes passage would be in taxpayers’ best interest.
The 10-year bond would add about $64.50 to the property tax bill for a home valued at $150,000. The 25-year, voter-approved bond would add about $37.50 a year.
(It’s worth noting that, just like a home mortgage, the longer repayment period would end up costing more. The cost of the 10-year bond at an estimated 3.75 percent would be about $13 million in interest. The 25-year bond would cost about $48.4 million.)
Although some local residents have questioned the need for a new jail and suggested greater use of alternative sentencing for offenders, the Journal Star editorial board believes the new jail is needed. The county is now spending more than $1 million a year sending prisoners to other counties because the jail is overcrowded.
Overcrowding has persisted even though officials have sharply increased the use of house arrest. Currently, more than 100 individuals are wearing electronic monitors in the house arrest program.
The increase in the number of prisoners is unlikely to slow. Since the current jail was built 16 years ago, the population of the county has increased almost 25 percent.
The new jail site on West O Street, which already has been purchased, will allow for future expansion of the jail, something that is not possible at the current site.
On balance, after weighing the pros and cons of the proposed bond issue, the Journal Star is swayed most by the desire to keep the local property tax rate low. The editorial board recommends a vote in favor of the jail bond, even if you have to hold your nose while doing it.
Copyright © 2002-2008 Lincoln Journal Star. All rights reserved.