Author: Nick Bergus

The Right Number is Zero

At its work session on Oct. 16, 2025, the Johnson County Board of Supervisors took the next step toward building a new jail. Megan Woolard of The Gazette:

The Johnson County Board of Supervisors is moving forward with plans for a new sheriff’s office and 120-bed jail. The decision comes after more than a year of disagreement between board members over the size of the proposed facility.

Board members have advocated for a number of beds ranging from 92 to 140 after Shive Hattery completed a space needs assessment in the summer of 2024 that called for an $80 million, 140-bed facility.

Following discussion at a work session Thursday, the board agreed to move forward with plans to build the footprint of a building with enough space for 140 beds but to only include 120 beds in the initial build.

Lots of the conversation around a new Johnson County jail has led to the suggestion that folks who, like me, question the findings of the “needs assessment”1; have some basic requests for what should be included; or ask “why this” are people who simply hate cops and are opposed to everything “new jail.” So let me first be clear about my stance:

The current building is not a workable long-term solution.

There are real concerns, and doing nothing fails to address those concerns.

There are real concerns about long-term commitment to current and expanded diversion efforts, and asking for trust fails to address those concerns.

Induced demand for incarceration is real.

The right number of beds is zero.

I’m not dumb. Zero isn’t realistically achievable tomorrow or next year or in a decade or within the theoretical lifespan of this new facility. But we know goals matter, and we have plenty of examples of setting the goal of zero and working towards it. Shooting for zero is much different than planning for 120 with room to expand to 140.

We do this ’til we free us.

In short, I oppose this proposal.

How Many Beds is 120 Beds?

Figuring out how many beds a specific number of beds actually is can be surprisingly tricky. Here’s Woolard:

When the current jail was opened in 1981, it was built with a capacity for 46 beds and the ability to add bunks to increase capacity to 92. However, Sheriff Brad Kunkel said the jail has an operational capacity of 65.

The number of beds in the current jail was increased to the doubled number soon after it opened. When we see a formal proposal for the voters, it will be important to ask how much additional capacity the Johnson County Sheriff will be able to add.

Is a 120-bed jail really a 240-bed jail? How do we know? If we can’t offer a straightforward number for capacity now, how can we state it so matter-of-factly for the future?

If our goal is zero, we would build no more than the 92-bed facility. We would bring inmates outside of the jail for enrichment and other programs, invest heavily in social supports we know work and find more, and build our capacity for new and existing diversion programs.

We Shouldn’t Build Extra Cages Just In Case

Supervisor Rod Sullivan offered road salt as an analogy, both on his blog and in the meeting, to suggest it’s simply common-sense to build extra capacity for the future:

It just makes sense. You have friends coming over for dinner. Is it better to have a little too much food, or not quite enough? We deal with this all the time in county government. Do we want to have a few too many ballots, or not enough ballots? Do we want to have a little extra salt and sand, or not enough? Do we want to have a little extra money to get through the year, or not enough? The answers are obvious! The same thing applies to jail beds. Do we want to have a few extra, or not enough? I want a few extra!

You can argue, “if you build it, they will just fill it.” But there is no evidence to back that up. Look at my earlier examples. Do we put down extra salt and sand just because we have it? No, we carry it forward. Do we spend extra money just because we have it? No, we carry it forward.

But using road salt (a supply) and cages for people (capacity) are very different. If we’re going to stick with a road analogy, a more appropriate one is road capacity.

Induced demand is real. Adding lanes brings more traffic just because we have the space.

Sullivan and Kunkel both rightly point out that the county doesn’t have precise control over the jail population, which depends on other law enforcement departments, judges, prosecutors, state law and many other factors.

In complex systems like transportation planning and criminal justice, capacity pressures are part of what encourages the various players in the system to make the choices we want to move towards.

If our goal is zero, we would leverage the pressure jail capacity brings to incentivize and build new programs that are alternatives to incarceration, such as mediation, restoration and transformation. We hear that we are discounting victims when we stand against jails, but our current system doesn’t truly offer closure for many victims; what if we built something that could offer closure and repair at scale?

It Often Makes Sense to Rent

We hear that this extra capacity is about saving taxpayers money by reducing the cost transporting inmates to and from other facilities. These costs are not cheap. Woolard again:

As a result, the county has been housing inmates outside of Johnson County and has spent nearly $16 million doing so over the last 20 years. Though generally, the county is spending less and sending fewer inmates out of county each year. […]

Between 2021 and 2023, the county paid an average of $387,000 a year to house inmates out of county, according to county data.

In 2024 the county spent around $376,000 housing inmates out of county, averaging around 18.5 inmates housed of county per month, according to Sheriff’s office data.

Those numbers reflect housing costs and do not include the expense of staff time or transportation-related costs.

Additionally, the cost to house out of county is subject to change depending on the rates other facilities set.

Keep in mind that an up-to-$99 million jail also doesn’t include the expenses of staff time.

Meanwhile, Supervisor Jon Green wants to think about the next 50 years (“The number that I keep returning to is 2075 because I think we have a responsibility to put forth a facility that potentially could serve the county for five decades,” he said at that meeting).

It’s not as simple as saying the next 50 years would cost us a back-of-the-envelope $40 million in inmate transportation, but we could transport a lot of inmates for the $99,000,000 proposed for the jail.

Sometimes renting makes more sense than buying, especially if our goal is to reduce the number of people we’re incarcerating and with Johnson County’s trend line going down. One of the tenets of buying instead of renting is that you eventually get back money when you sell it, but we’re not selling this jail when we’re done.

If our goal is zero, we would prefer the temporary investment of transporting folks at the times the jail is over capacity and work toward ways to reduce the occurrence of those times.

We Must Fund Diversion

There’s also a disagreement around funding other public safety priorities, including the diversion efforts the initial Shive-Hattery report called necessary. The agreement on Thursday was to give the literal leftovers from a $99-million bond to affordable housing. Woolard:

While the board has discussed the role of social services and diversion measures throughout the process of working toward the future of the sheriff’s office and jail, Thursday’s work session was the first time the possibility of directing bond funds to affordable housing efforts has been brought up.

I don’t think this is a fair characterization. Diversion and social services have literally been at the center of this entire discussion.

We continue to hear that we’re doing diversion — and we are — but we don’t know what the ceiling is, and don’t seem to be particularly interested in finding it.

That’s a real shame.

If our goal is zero, we would start here — how do we get the most people out of cages — and then decide what we have left for our jail.

If our goal is zero, as it rightly should be, this whole exercise has been backwards, and until we approach this problem as one about rehabilitation and restoration and love, we will fail to solve it.

Aiming for zero isn’t optimism. It’s hope. Hope that victims can get real reparation for the harms they’ve faced. Hope that families can stay together. Hope that we invest in things that keep people safe. Hope that we can build systems centered on love instead of retribution. Hope that we stop investing in an inhumane system of state-sanctioned violence.

Someday.

  1. I don’t think calling the Shive-Hattery report a “needs assessment” properly frames it. The report isn’t a wish list, either, even though it includes one. I will refer to it as the Shive-Hattery report. ↩︎

Why I Voted for Amy Hospodarsky

I posted this back on Oct. 6 on social media, but failed to add it here. Early voting is going on Nov. 1, 2 and 3, and Election Day is Nov. 4, 2025.

The choice is so clear for the Iowa City Council District B seat on Nov. 4: Amy Hospodarsky.

As a fellow lover of Iowa City, my path has crossed Amy’s many times, in ways both personal and professional. I know her best through our overlapping board service, first with The Englert Theatre and currently with the South of 6 Iowa City Business District.

I’ve come to know her as the person who will ask the important questions, say the hard thing, and make sure there is accountability for follow through.

Just showing up to meetings and voting isn’t enough. No matter what a candidate claims, it’s not action. We need people who will champion action that advances our shared values and make decisions based on facts, not allegiances. Amy Hospodarsky is one of those people, and I’m proud to vote for her for Iowa City Council.

Also on my Nov. 4 ballot:

Iowa City City Council At-Large: Clara Reynen

Iowa City Community School District Board of Directors: Ruthina Malone and Jennifer Horn-Frasier

Local Option Sales Tax Ballot Measure: Yes

Why Would It Reopen?

Sometime next week, the current shutdown of the federal government will become the longest lasting one in United States history. The House of Representatives has been out of session (er, in a district work period) since Sept. 20, and there hasn’t been much smoke around conversations to actually find a solution beyond recrimination of the fully out-of-power Democrats.

I don’t think will ever reopen in any meaningful way.

Reducing the federal workforce is unpopular and painful, but if you just…stop issuing paychecks…a lot of people will just leave. This administration will continue to find ways, legal and illegal because it doesn’t care, to pay the people it wants and, presumably, pay for the things it wants.

Voting to take away SNAP benefits and other social safety net programs is unpopular and painful, but if the programs just…have no money…then this problem solves itself.

Rewriting and passing new laws and regulations takes time and energy but if you just…let it all fall apart…there’s no one to enforce the law and you can just marshal special task forces to go after your political enemies and pet issues.

Once these things are broken, and people get past the initial shock of it, why would you ever reopen in a real way? You’ve achieved your longstanding aim.

If your party wants to dismantle government — which Republicans do — and controls the federal government — which Republicans do — and is willing to break the law to achieve its goals — which Republicans are — you can basically let entropy take hold to break the parts you want to break and fund the pieces you want to keep.

Finally

My reply to my Congresswoman Mariannette Miller-Meeks’ newsletter with the subject line “Iowa Delegation Urges Senate to Reopen the Government” (no link but it says exactly what you think it does):

It is time to reopen the federal government. 

I’m excited that Republicans, who are in full control of our federal government, have finally decided to fund and re-open the federal government. It has been bizarre to see you folks who, again, control the Senate, House, White House and, for good measure, the Supreme Court, flail and fail to run the government including the most basic piece: passing an annual budget.

Blaming the minority, out-of-control party for, again, failing to run the government that is fully under the control of Republics is, frankly, wild and leaves me to question your understanding of how our government works, which has always involved some smart compromises for the greater good. Continuing to decry your helplessness in this is transparent and harmful.

This is stepping in front of a bus and pretending the bus itself pushed you.

Grow up and govern.

Underwhelming

The City of Iowa City, under the headline “City of Iowa City issues statement on Sept. 25 incident” in reference to the highly visible chasing, tackling and detention, by unidentified agents of the state, presumably from United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, using an unmarked van, of Jorge Elieser González Ochoa during his work day in downtown Iowa City:

The City of Iowa City is aware of an incident involving federal law enforcement at Bread Garden Market, 225 S. Linn St., that occurred around 11 a.m. on Thursday, Sept. 25, 2025. The City was not involved in the initial incident and did not have advanced knowledge.

As the incident was unfolding, Iowa City Police were dispatched to Bread Garden for a disturbance in progress related to the incident. The federal law enforcement action was concluded prior to officers’ arrival.

Because the City had no prior knowledge and was not directly involved with this incident, all questions should be directed to federal authorities.

Since this “not us” statement: nothing.

There were local politicians, some of whom are running for reelection, who provided some proof-of-attending-the-call-to-action social media posts.

There’s nothing on the agenda for the regular work session or the regular formal meeting on Tuesday.

Meanwhile, we have well-meaning white people ready to call 911 if ICE shows up [buzzer noise and/or sad trombone] and understandably scared or at least uncomfortable folks who wonder what the fuck local government might do if something like this happens again.

So what the fuck are you doing?

Wrong, Period

Nate Holdren in The Little Village:

People of conscience must not let ourselves be pulled into line-drawing between acceptable and unacceptable instances of this violence committed by the government. The historical record is very clear that justice movements lose when they let themselves be sidetracked into litigating when forms of state violence are acceptable vs. unacceptable, often in an effort to seem reasonable so as to be palatable to the rich, powerful, and officially respectable.

This letter is about ICE and immigration and deportation but also slavery and war and civil rights and capital punishment and torture and other forms of state violence.

Don’t stop there. It’s also about why people of conscience must work to end policing full stop.

The Narrative

Des Moines Public Schools Superintendent Ian Roberts was reportedly well loved by the community, students, parents and teachers. He’s well educated and a former Olympian. Here he is in a suit racing students for fun. It’s sweet.

So the Ministry of Truth got to work.

Sam Olson, described by the Associated Press as an “ICE enforcement and removal operations regional official”:

This suspect was arrested in possession of a loaded weapon in a vehicle provided by Des Moines Public Schools after fleeing federal law enforcement.

[…]

How this illegal alien was hired without work authorization, a final order of removal, and a prior weapons charge is beyond comprehension and should alarm the parents of that school district.

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds in a press release:

The arrest on Friday of Des Moines Public Schools Superintendent Ian Roberts was shocking, particularly his attempt to evade authorities, and the loaded gun, knife, and large sum of cash found in his vehicle.

Rep. Ashley Hinson, who is running for US Senate, on her campaign X account:

ICE arrested the Superintendent of Des Moines Public Schools, Ian Andre Roberts — an illegal alien from Guyana & active ICE fugitive with a deportation order since May 2024. When ICE caught him, agents found a loaded gun, a hunting knife, and $3,000 in cash.

Rep. Randy Feenstra on his campaign X account:

Thank you to ICE for detaining the Superintendent of Des Moines Public Schools — an illegal immigrant with a criminal record who was caught with a loaded gun and $3,000 in cash.

All of these people are rabid supporters of a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment, but in their mind Black people aren’t afforded that right. Now, throw in the mention of a “hunting” knife (Roberts was reportedly a hunter and it is nearly hunting season in Iowa) and cash — the only source for which is the ICE official’s statement — and you’ve got yourself A Narrative™ straight from the Scary Black Man Who Deserves Whatever He Gets Playbook.

The prolific use of the phrase “illegal alien” and the random inclusion of a Scary Black Man photo from 2020 are red flags this trope is in play, of course. Journalists should be skeptical, and the public shouldn’t fall for the framing.

The rule of law includes the presumption of innocence and due process.

Abduction & Terrorism & Law Enforcement

A few thoughts about the local impact of the abduction, by federal agents, of Jorge Elieser González Ochoa from his place of work in downtown Iowa City:

The time, place and manner of the seizure is the point. As the organization Escucha Mi Voz said, “This reckless action is an attack not only on Jorge and his family, but on our entire community.” This is terrorism, and the only thing that should truly be surprising is that this is the first time this has happened in Iowa City.

Bystanders calling 911 to report an abduction in broad daylight seems reasonable, but what would have happened should the Iowa City Police have arrived before Immigration and Customs Enforcement had left the scene? Almost certainly not a dearresting. More likely local law enforcement would have kept bystanders at bay.

The Little Village headline, “ICE violently seizes an immigrant worker at Bread Garden Market in Iowa City,” is accurate, but is not out of the normal range of violence expected for local law enforcement, including the Iowa City Police or Johnson County Sheriff’s departments.

So what’s next? There will be increased pressure to collaborate with ICE locally, including the State requiring us to have contracts with federal authorities for our officers, jail cells and weapons. Local officials who refuse to question our continuing and increasing investment in police and policing and then stand by “horrified” or offering other platitudes of support are failing as they become a bike fall meme.