County postpones alcohol licensing decisions
Randolph County Commission put off decisions about alcohol licensing until its Dec. 20 meeting.
County attorney John Tinney attended the Dec. 6 workshop meeting. He advised the group they’re all bound by state law. Municipalities may add distances from churches and schools, but the county may not make such laws. There are no distances in the state law; it was in there at one time but was declared unconstitutional. The county may appeal to the ABC Board and challenge a proximity, but most of those appeals fail.
The county may set fees at up to 50 percent of what the state charges for the licenses. They also need to appoint a licensing board to look over the applications. This will be time-consuming at first.
“As quick as y’all do that, y’all can start approving them out in the county,” said Tinney.
Jail problems
During the workshop meeting, plumbing contractor Richard Sprouse addressed the commission about his bid to replumb all of Randolph County Jail. He had a detailed list of materials that he bid on, but now he sees that materials were not included in the list that will be necessary. (Another bidder who has done work at the jail drew up the materials list.)
Sprouse said the most expensive part is the fixtures, which they’ve already ordered and received. The ballpark figure for adding in the additional parts is approximately double. Sprouse said he has drawings now and can tell them exactly what’s missing. Sprouse also said that some of the items listed in the original materials sheet were overestimated and so there will be some savings there.
Tinney said he thinks the county should re-bid the parts left off the original materials list since Sprouse’s company had already ordered the fixtures and has started fulfilling their contract.
Sheriff David Cofield apologized for the problem with the bids, saying he is not a plumber.
The sheriff updated the commission on the crowded situation at the jail now. He has been talking with judges, trying to get some relief. Cofield asked the commission to again consider a new jail for the population that cannot be controlled.
“We’re doing what we can, but it could be a serious issue,” the sheriff said.
Commission Chairman Lathonia Wright said, “The state doesn’t give us (the commission) the power to tax, except for education. The people have voted it down before. If a federal judge says build it, you build it.”
County administrator Cindy Arrington said they have budgeted practically all capital improvement money already this year.
Wright said he has always gotten calls about the jail. It’s survived two riots. A committee could start talking about adding to the jail, possibly funded through a bond issue. It could be an addition for minimum-security prisoners in a dormitory setting.
During Monday’s meeting, Commissioner Richard Fetner said a representative from the dome company that built Roanoke’s jail could be at the Dec. 20 meeting. Each dome can serve 36 prisoners.
“He will give us an idea of what we’re looking at,” said Fetner. He told the sheriff, “Your water and sewerage would be a lot better off.”
Cofield answered, “It was designed for 36, and it’s not holding up.”
Wright wondered if it’s practical to spend $100,000 on the re-bid for plumbing. They tabled that until the dome representative could come to the next meeting.
“That’s a lot of money we’re talking about, but if we’re to have a safe community we have to have someplace to put them,” said Commissioner Larry Roberts. “I don’t like to spend the money either.”
Fetner added, “As far as the dome shape, we’re just looking at possibilities. It’s the cheapest way we can get by. A federal judge could make it $15-$20 million.”
The jail count Monday was 87, after eight had left for prison.
Community Correction program
The commission failed to approve implementation of the Community Correction Program in Randolph County.
Cofield said this is a program that helps prisons relieve overcrowding, and they pay $10 per day for those released to be supervised. Randolph County has 30 nonviolent state prisoners who would be eligible.
The county may also charge them a supervision fee. Many other counties are doing this. Private companies could also manage the prisoners.
The vote was 2-1-2 with Wright voting no and Fetner and Mike Hester abstaining because they were not present to see the original presentation on this earlier.
(For more from the Randolph County Commission see the December 12 issue of The Randolph Leader.)
