An Open Letter to the County Board and the Citizens of Sauk County

March 26, 2010

Sauk County Board of Supervisors and the Citizens of Sauk County:

As some of you know, I have decided to retire as Sauk County Sheriff at the end of my term, December 31, 2010. The purpose of this letter to you is to formally inform you of that decision and to address a few other issues.

One of those issues is the Spring Election and an attempt by at least one supervisor to influence a number of contested County Board races by publishing a trail of misinformation and half truths.

On that note, A-pod continues to be an issue embroiled in controversy and confusion which is a direct result of a small group of individuals who are unable or unwilling to accept the well documented facts. Those individuals compare jail operations in 2000 to our 2008 operation. In 2000 we managed a 145 bed facility (49 in the jail and 96 beds in the Huber Center) with an average daily inmate population of 151.4; not to mention the inmates housed in other jails and the lack of an Electronic Monitoring Program.

In 2008 we managed a 463 bed jail, 192 of those beds are Huber beds. The average daily population in 2008 was 289.83. Consequently, we needed to add more staff. Did the cost of jail operations increase? – Yes. That increase in staff was a result of a special committee’s recommendation to the full board which debated the issue and ultimately approved the increase; including Supervisor Kriegl who voted “yes”.

Supervisor Kriegl, his attorney and friends continue to point to the empty beds in the 463 bed facility as the reason to close A-pod. However, as explained on numerous occasions, the County Jail only has 271 total beds. The Huber Center (a totally different unlocked facility operated by the County Jail) has 192 beds. (Together the total beds are 463). By State Statute, the two different facilities cannot consolidate, house or exchange inmates whether it is more cost effective or not. In February of this year we had an average of 70-80 inmates in the Huber Center. That means on average there were between 112-120 unoccupied Huber beds. Empty beds in the Huber Center cannot be used or assigned to inmates housed in the County Jail (A or B Pods). The Huber Center is an unlocked work release facility and can only be used by inmates with work release privileges. The bottom line is that if A-pod were closed we would only be able to house on average 35 rental inmates per day, instead of over 100 we are currently housing now. (on March 18 we were holding 116 paying inmates).

Regarding the Department of Corrections monthly report (DOC) I continue to find it amazing that some citizens, newspapers and others find it difficult to understand. This document simply reports the difference of A-pod from its position of being closed to being open. When closed there were costs associated with it. When it was opened every new expenditure has been identified and reported along with the revenue. Last year A-pod generated over $700,000 more revenue than expenses. I noted Attorney Schernecker and others are reporting that this number is false and that in-fact we lost money. Again he is unable to report factual information. The employee’s hired to staff A-pod cost approximately $800,869, but every cent of that is off-set by the revenue generated by selling those beds, and more. The $700,000 in excess revenue helps reduce our tax levy.

At the March County Board the final portion of the Training Facility project was authorized, which brings closure to the project. Within the past several days I noted one or more letters to the editor and campaign documents from Attorney Schernecker reporting that the project has cost the tax payers between $800,000 and $880,000; when in fact the total project, which is essentially completed at a cost of $386,746 is well under the two year budgeted amount of $500,000.

The Open Records lawsuit filed against me by Supervisor Kriegl and Attorney Schernecker, continues to this day. I and my staff have dedicated thousands of hours to this issue, time that could have been spent in a much more meaningful endeavors’ such as proactive crime prevention programs, finding ways to become more fiscally responsible and badly needed updated training programs. My attorney continues to work on this issue at a growing monetary cost to the citizens of this County. Because this issue is still being litigated I am not at liberty to discuss the details associated with it, other than to say that the case was presented to a circuit court judge and that judge dismissed Supervisor Kriegl’s claim. As my attorney recently stated in a letter to myself and others, “I have litigated hundreds of cases, and dozens of open records cases. This is one of the most egregious instances of abusive litigation I have ever seen. The underlying dispute about open records could have been resolved by common sense years ago. It is clear that the real purpose of this case has been, from the start, to embarrass the Sheriff and the County”.

In a letter to the editor on March 22, Supervisor Kriegl made more outrageous claims concerning the dollar amounts needed for equipment, operation of the Sheriff’s Department, including the cost of added employees for the building, overtime hours, squad cars, the shooting range, etc. etc.

In the 2003 budget, to open the new facility, the County Board authorized minimum staffing for the Jail with the understanding that vacant positions due to vacation, sick leave and other excused absences would be covered by overtime, which it has. We did not purchase a new snowmobile, the one that we have is 30+ years old. The boats are fully funded over a 5 year period by the Department of Natural Resources. The Sheriff’s Department did not buy a driving simulator; it was purchased by the Risk Safety Manager, and used by other departments as well as by the Sheriff’s Department. The sniper rifle we purchased cost $4,882.68 and no tax levy dollars were used to buy it. The Training Facility is addressed above. The new tower system was recommended by a special committee to address the needs identified by Rural Fire Departments and all funds and management of that project was by the Building and Property Director, not the Sheriff’s Office. These exaggerations are typical of most or all of Supervisor Kriegl’s claims, which leaves his creditability in question. And, as you know, I have never conducted County business on the editorial page of a newspaper, rather I have met with the appropriate committees and officials to discuss and implement projects and programs when needed or authorized to do so.

The office of County Supervisor has never been easy and is never a single issue. Having worked with most of you, I know that you understand that the Sheriff’s Office is simply a piece of a much larger picture. As Sauk County continues to increase in population, in industry, in tourism and in demands for services, you have taken your duties and responsibilities very seriously, you have maintained a fiscally responsible budget and you have done an excellent job.

It has truly been an honor to work and serve you and all of the citizens of Sauk County.

Very truly yours,

Randy Stammen, Sheriff

CC: Administrative Coordinator,       Corporation Counsel