Just days after the Iowa City City Council voted in favor of continuing discussions with the county about the shared law enforcement facility, Johnson County Sheriff Brad Kunkel walked back his support.
Advantages to building a shared facility would have included roughly $10 million in savings, compared to building separate facilities, and a lower voter approval threshold for a potential bond initiative from 60% to 50%.
A new shared facility seemed increasingly likely — both the county and the city had formally agreed to continue discussions. But hearing from some city officials left a bitter taste in the sheriff's mouth.
“I don’t think there’s a good relationship to be had with elected officials who were outspoken about their lack of support for law enforcement, or don’t see any value in law enforcement,” Kunkel said.
Though the city council voted 4-3 to continue discussions with the county, some council members were firmly opposed to certain aspects of the proposed facility, such as its location, the number of beds it would have and the fact that it was to be shared with the county.
“I’ve been reading rooms for 25 years, almost, in law enforcement,” Kunkel said. “And, I read the room and I just didn’t see this as a viable option that I was going to support. So, I’m out.”
Members of the public and council members said they were worried about the potential loss of local control that could come with the construction of a new jail.
The resolution council members were considering would have started the process of establishing a three-person committee to oversee the jail’s operations. The committee would have included one person appointed by the city, another by the county and a third person that both entities would decide together.
“I would rather Iowa City have more direct impact over the culture that we have made here in Iowa City for our police department, and not necessarily giving power to a sheriff’s department,” said Council member Oliver Weilein.
Together, the entities would have had to make the necessary appointments and decide on a location for the shared facility on a crunched timeline. Council members said both processes would be fraught given the stated goal of having a ballot initiative ready by November 2026.
Other opponents said bolstering diversion strategies aimed at connecting people with community resources rather than the justice system would be a better use of the estimated $106 million that would go towards construction of the proposed facility.
“We need fewer people entering the [justice] system in the first place,” said Council member Mazahir Salih. “If we want to build a safer, more just community, we must invest in people, not prison. Let us fund care, not cages.”
According to a 2024 study by OPN Architects, a stand-alone facility for the city’s police department could cost between $32 million and $36.5 million.
Sheriff is hopeful despite previous failed bond referendums
Both the Iowa City Police Department and the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office are short on space and operating out of aging buildings.
In the county jail, which houses the sheriff’s office, desks are moved away from the wall to avoid ceiling leaks from HVAC systems, water pipes or sewer lines. There are cracks in the walls and stains on the ceiling panels.
A study conducted last year by the architectural consulting firm Shive Hattery said the jail, which was build in 1981, has outlived its functional capacity by over a decade.
“The urgency the county has is not the same as the one the city has,” Kunkel said. “We’re in a much different position because we’ve been talking about the structural issues the jail faces and the maintenance issues the jail faces.”
Now, the county faces a 60% voter threshold that would have to be met for a bond initiative to pass next year. Constructing a stand-alone county facility is expected to cost around $80 million.
In 2012 and 2013, separate referendums for a new jail failed to reach the necessary 60% voter approval threshold, though more than half voted for it on each occasion.
“We’re consistently seen a majority of the public support this, just not enough of the majority to meet the statutory requirement,” Kunkel said.
“I really think the climate has changed on this in the county since the last failed referendums."Johnson County Sheriff Brad Kunkel
But now, he said, things have changed. An August survey conducted by the University of Iowa Center for Social Science Innovation found that, unweighted, 74% of residents would support building a new sheriff's office and jail.
“I really think the climate has changed on this in the county since the last failed referendums,” Kunkel said. “One of the loud messages that came from that was the public wanted to see more work done in the world of jail diversion.”
He added that since the referendums failed and those concerns were raised, he thinks community stakeholders have risen to the challenge.
A report shared last year from the Iowa City Police Department stated that decreases in theft- and drug-related offenses may be a result of recent investments in diversion systems. In 2024, police made 159 referrals to the city’s GuideLink Center, which helps individuals experiencing mental health or substance abuse crises — a number that has stayed relatively steady since the center opened in 2021.
The number of total arrests has declined in recent years, despite Iowa City’s growing population, from 5,465 arrests in 2016 to 2,700 in 2024.
The Johnson County Jail Diversion program connects individuals struggling with substance abuse or their mental health to community resources during their incarceration.
The sheriff’s office also employs a mental health liaison who is a specially trained individual charged with responding to mental health crises. Between November 2024 and January 2025, the liaison responded to 62 calls. Of those, none were incarcerated.
“The menu of options that are out there within Johnson County that have a hand in the effort to reduce the jail population is significant,” Kunkel said. “I mean, we’re leading the way in the state.”
Kunkel said utilizing diversion strategies is important but so is ensuring sure law enforcement has the resources to do its job.
“You can continue to do both, with the end goal basically being the same — a better functioning system,” he said. “But we have to make sure we’re not doing that at the expense of crime victims, of public safety, of protecting people who are vulnerable from perpetrators.”
Kunkel said the Johnson County Board of Supervisors will discuss the number of beds for the proposed facility and potential locations in the coming weeks.
