Institute analyzing proposed sites for Marion County criminal justice complex

Dave Stafford
March 7, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana University Public Policy Institute is analyzing proposed sites for a Marion County Criminal Justice Complex and may reveal its findings by the end of next week.

“The judges are constitutionally responsible for and very interested in good, individual accessibility for a new judicial center,” said Kathy Davis of Davis Design Group, who is working with judges to facilitate an analysis. Davis is a former lieutenant governor, state budget director and Indianapolis city controller.

Davis said the Public Policy Institute is evaluating various sites for a proposed criminal justice complex using what she termed a gravity study and a transportation study. The gravity study would weigh proposed sites in comparison to populations that most use criminal justice services. The transportation component would judge sites on the basis of accessibility for those with cars and those who use mass transit.

PPI will look at sites the city identified in a market analysis, Davis said. While city officials have said no site has been identified, the market analysis ranked an Indianapolis International Airport site along Washington Street east of Raceway Road as the preferred location.

Meanwhile, Indianapolis Director of Enterprise Development David Rosenberg on Friday briefed judges of the Marion Superior Executive Committee about the recently released short list of groups vying to build the facility.

Rosenberg said a presentation about the status of the complex proposal will be made to criminal judges at the next meeting of the Marion Superior Criminal Term at noon March 13 in the courtroom of Superior Judge Lisa Borges. Rosenberg said a proposed site could be announced by the end of the month.

The complex could cost several hundred million dollars, but backers including Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard and Marion County Sheriff John Layton say the facility could be funded by savings realized from consolidation and gained efficiencies. Current plans call for consolidation of criminal court and jail functions as well as related offices such as prosecutor, probation and public defender.

Groups on the short list to build the facility are:

— WMB Heartland Justice Partners, led by equity members Meridiam Infrastructure Indy Justice LLC, Balfour Beatty Investments Inc. and Walsh Investors LLC with major non-equity contributions by Walsh Construction Co. II LLC, Heery International Inc., Cofely Services Inc., Skidmore Owings & Merrill LLP; and Dewberry Architects.

— Indy Justice Partners, led by equity members Fengate Capital Management Ltd., AECOM Global Fund I LP and Shiel Sexton Co. Inc., with major contributions by W.G. Yates & Sons Construction Co., Tishman Construction Corp. and Johnson Controls. Frost Brown Todd LLC attorneys are non-equity members.

— Plenary Edgemoor Justice Partners, led by Plenary Group USA Ltd. and Edgemoor Infrastructure & Real Estate LLC. Major non-equity members are Clark Construction Group LLC, F.A. Wilhelm Construction Co. Inc., HDR Architecture Inc. and CBRE. Krieg DeVault LLP is a non-equity member.

Those groups will be invited to submit a request for proposals that will further define each proposal. According to the city’s timeline for the project, RFPs will be due in the summer and a preferred group will be selected in September with a proposal submitted to the City-County Council.

Davis said the analysis came about quickly because the process is moving quickly.

“The judges are working hard to respond to the city’s schedule,” she said. "When the people with the project and the authority are on the fast track, the rest of us must respond accordingly.”



  • Question to those who know
    Is this going to be a new supplement to the existing facilities on the east side of downtown, or a full replacement?

Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.