MITCHELL — Just one night after an in-person forum at Mitchell Technical Institute, residents and panelists reconvened online Wednesday evening for a virtual continuation of the state’s prison relocation discussions. The format allowed for deeper exploration of operational and planning issues — and brought in voices absent from Tuesday’s event, including Secretary of Corrections Kellie Wasko and Yankton Thrive CEO Nancy Wenande.

Moderated by former Davison County auditor Susan Kiepke, the online session was structured as a Q and A, with the public submitting questions in advance and through the forum chat. Though the format did not allow for live public comment or rebuttal, it delivered key clarifications and expanded on the state’s vision for a modern correctional facility.

While Mitchell has become a frontrunner in the discussion, its inclusion represents a shift in strategy from earlier state planning. Originally, the state’s search for a replacement prison was focused within 20 miles of Sioux Falls, aligning with a 2021 study conducted by DLR Group, an architectural and engineering firm that specializes in justice facility design. That study recommended a 160-acre site near Sioux Falls based on infrastructure, staffing, and logistical considerations.

A more recent consultant report continued to prioritize the Sioux Falls area, largely due to workforce access. However, after the legislature failed to approve construction during the last session, Governor Larry Rhoden formed the Prison Reset Task Force to reevaluate options. The task force was tasked with considering all possible locations statewide.

Twelve communities submitted proposals, including Mitchell, Aberdeen, Huron, Grant County and a smaller proposal from Yankton. A consultant narrowed the list to five sites based on multiple factors (though no single factor was decisive), and the committee ultimately eliminated Aberdeen, Huron and Grant County.

Mitchell and Worthing are now the two remaining sites being analyzed for feasibility of housing a new prison with capacities of 800, 1,200, or 1,500 beds. Final site assessments will be informed by architectural and engineering reports expected at the next committee meeting on July 8.

Wenande, though noting Yankton is not a finalist, said her community might still consider hosting a smaller facility and praised Mitchell’s strategic location.

“Mitchell may have an easier ability to recruit workforce because of their proximity to the interstate between Sioux Falls and Mitchell compared to Yankton,” she said.

Addressing a common concern voiced at the in-person Mitchell forum, Rep. Jeff Bathke (R-Mitchell), Davison County’s Planning and Zoning Administrator, explained that state-owned property is not subject to local zoning laws. That means a rezoning process will not be required if the site near Mitchell is selected.

Wasko addressed lingering public concerns with detailed information about the proposed correctional facility’s purpose, design and staffing. A primary misconception, she noted, is that the facility would house only maximum-security inmates.

“This will include all custody levels — minimum, restricted minimum, medium, and close custody,” Wasko said.

Most inmates will fall into the medium-security category, with some minimum-custody offenders working on prison grounds. It will not be a work-release facility.

Staffing was another focal point. Wasko reported that uniformed staff vacancy rates have dropped significantly — from 35% to just 6–8% in the last 18 months — a sign, she said, of greater workforce stability.

“We would not open an institution unless we had adequate staffing to open that institution,” she emphasized.

Wasko also addressed a key community concern: inmate re-entry.

“No one walks out of prison into the host community unmonitored,” she said, explaining that offenders leave in state vehicles, are picked up by family, or are transported to re-entry programs that begin 90 to 180 days before release.

Design features were another major topic, especially regarding rural integration. Wasko described significant security and lighting advancements, including 300- to 600-foot setbacks from fences, perimeter detection systems and LED directional lighting designed to minimize light pollution.

She added that noise would be minimal.

“Very rarely will you ever hear any kind of intercom announcements,” Wasko said.

As for potential displacement of current corrections staff, Wasko reiterated her commitment to protecting jobs.

“I will do everything in my power not to lose employees or lay any employees off,” she said.

Wenande shared her community’s experience hosting a federal prison camp for over three decades. Located in the heart of Yankton, across from a school and football field, the facility operates with minimal disruption.

“There was public concern in the 1980s, but now it’s part of the community fabric,” she said, emphasizing that no one has ever declined to move to or invest in Yankton due to the prison’s presence.

The aging state penitentiary in Sioux Falls, known as “The Hill,” was built in 1881, before South Dakota achieved statehood. Ryan Brunner, a senior policy advisor and director of legislative relations in the governor’s office, described it as “no longer safe for staff, the community, or inmates.”

Wasko added that remodeling the current facility is prohibitively expensive and dangerous.

“The costs can be tripled or quadrupled when building inside an existing secure perimeter,” she said.

Operational limitations include outdated architecture, lack of rehabilitation space, and no room for vocational or educational programming. The current prison model — designed in an era of inmate lockdowns and quarry work — is misaligned with today’s focus on treatment and re-entry, Wasko explained.

Expanding the nearby Jameson Annex would also fall short: an additional story would add just 192 beds, and retrofitting its mechanical systems would be costly. Relocating 800 inmates during construction would be logistically difficult and cost $10–20 million in temporary housing alone. With current facilities at 133% capacity, the state lacks space to shuffle inmates for such a project.

The next phase in the site selection process will occur on July 8, when architects and engineers present detailed site assessments. The Prison Reset Task Force will use that information to make further recommendations.

As Wasko concluded the forum, she offered a final reflection on the prison’s potential role in any host community:

“Prisons can be good neighbors.”