In a letter discussed today by the Oklahoma County Board of Commissioners, Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond’s office encouraged commissioners and Oklahoma City leaders to find a fix in the zoning dispute that has drawn litigation over the county’s new jail proposed for 1901 E. Grand Blvd.
Before he left office in November, former Oklahoma Rep. Jon Echols (R-OKC) requested an attorney general’s opinion to clarify whether the county has sovereignty over land it owns, such as the proposed jail site. In response, he received a Dec. 12 “letter of counsel” owing to “the time-sensitive nature of this request.”
“Oklahoma County’s new jail project serves ‘broader governmental interests’ and, therefore, is so important that a court would likely grant immunity to the county’s determination of the new county jail site despite substantial and even compelling local interests,” wrote Deputy General Counsel Thomas Schneider. “Essentially, there will be concerns or objections raised — founded or unfounded — no matter where Oklahoma County chooses to build the new detention center. To allow concerns and objections to control the conversation would equate to an endless cycle of inaction between Oklahoma City and Oklahoma County. And no one wins, no progress is achieved.”
While the OKC Planning Commission signed off on the Grand Boulevard location for the jail, the OKC City Council later rejected a county rezoning request. The county sued the city in June, alleging it does not need municipal zoning approval to pursue its core obligation to provide a jail, particularly when OKC does not operate its own jail.
Commissioners voted Friday to direct Oklahoma County District Attorney Vicki Behenna to communicate with the city in an attempt to resolve the dispute out of court. The two parties are scheduled Jan. 23 for a pretrial conference in Oklahoma County District Court in front of Tulsa County District Judge Doug Drummond. District 2 Commissioner Brian Maughan said during Friday’s meeting he hopes OKC leaders will reconsider their previous decision. The OKC City Council’s next meeting is set for Tuesday morning.
“It’s certainly my hope that the City Council hears our plea that we are trying to work through this as neighbors of one another’s government entities and that we both serve the same constituents,” Maughan said during the meeting. “I appreciate that the attorney general understands the seriousness of both the issue and the timeline that we’re under in this matter. I’m hoping this will result in a positive outcome.”
The dispute centers on whether the county can claim governmental sovereignty and move forward with construction of the jail and its associated mental health facility regardless of the city’s zoning rules. Much rides on the outcome. Oklahoma County voters approved $260 million in bonds to build the new jail in 2022, but the cost of the facility since that vote has escalated from about $300 million to more than $600 million. Filling that gap, and wading through a lengthy legal process with the city, has created a two-front war in the county’s effort to build the jail.
RELATED
New Oklahoma County Jail soap opera hangs on a cliff by Matt Patterson
Thursday’s letter of counsel cited a U.S. Supreme Court case involving Rutgers University and concluded that Oklahoma County has immunity from city zoning.
“Reviewing the Rutgers factors outlined above, Oklahoma County should enjoy immunity in this matter,” Schneider wrote. “First, Oklahoma County and Oklahoma City are merely one step apart. Oklahoma County encompasses most of Oklahoma City. But this factor is not determinative. Second, the function or land use involved will be forced detention. In this matter, the Oklahoma City Planning Department and Commission both recommended approval of the special use permit. Yet, the City Council voted to deny the permit. In essence, prior to denial, city personnel saw no reason to reject the application due to negative effects on public health, safety and welfare.”
Schneider said the jail project also serves the public interest and that the Grand Boulevard property’s current heavy industrial zoning status does not matter much.
“This zoning has little bearing on the proposed use of the property for forced detention,” Schneider wrote. “Indeed, the proposed use will cause less of an environmental footprint. Further, to the extent that any issues still exist, Oklahoma County agreed to changes raised in the technical evaluation. Also, Oklahoma County chose a location away from security-sensitive establishments like schools, daycares, and houses of worship.”
But Oklahoma County doesn’t have free reign to disregard or override city zoning laws either, Schneider wrote in his conclusion.
“This does not, however, give Oklahoma County carte blanche discretion to run roughshod in disregard of Oklahoma City’s valid and pressing concerns about the proposed jail site. Instead, Oklahoma County ought to consult with Oklahoma City, listen and study local objections, problems, and find suggestions in order to minimize the conflict,” he wrote.
Kristy Yager, Oklahoma City’s director of public information, said the city had no comment on the letter of counsel released this week.
Read the letter from Thomas Schneider
