ILNews

Marion County announces plan to build new criminal justice complex

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Under a plan announced by city and court officials Wednesday, Marion County’s courts, jails and other offices would be located in one complex instead of spread out around downtown Indianapolis and the county.

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard, Marion Superior Judge David Certo and Marion County Sheriff John Layton announced the plans, which have been decades in the making. Ballard said the modern facility will improve public safety and generate enough efficiencies to pay for the new complex without a tax increase.

Right now, the criminal justice support facilities are spread throughout Indianapolis, with some facilities miles apart. The process after a person is arrested in Marion county requires multiple transfers to different buildings, which officials says is time consuming and expensive. The new design would streamline that process and eliminate hazards such as radio dead zones and blind spots, making the facilities safer. Staff, visitors and litigants currently share space with violent offenders.

“Our mission in the Marion Superior Court compels us to provide an appropriate, safe and accessible setting for litigants and the public,” Certo said. “The outdated layout of our current facilities prevents us from meeting these goals with our courtrooms, offices, and public spaces. I enthusiastically support this long overdue effort to create a new and safer court facility.”

The complex would house separate adult and juvenile jails along with inmate processing, detention and criminal court facilities. The offices of the prosecutor, public defender, probation and community corrections would also be in the complex. The clerk, coroner, crime lab and other state and federal agencies could follow.

The plan calls for the new judicial center to include space for 25 to 30 courtrooms, which would provide relief for the nearly 40 Circuit and Superior courts now housed in the City-County Building.

No location has been determined yet and officials will begin evaluating proposals in February 2014 with final section by September. The goal is for construction to begin in 2015 with a projected opening date of 2018.

By combining the facilities and offices in one area, the buildings will use shared resources such as food preparation and maintenance services. Transportation costs will also be reduced as moving inmates through the current system adds tens of thousands of dollars in additional security costs.

The county expects these cost savings as well as the reallocation of budget dollars from current contracts and leases that are set to expire, and private retail rental on the new property, to pay for the project.

The city also sees development potential for the land where Jail 1, Jail 2 and the Community Corrections facilities sit in downtown Indianapolis. That land was recently valued at $17.6 million.  
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT