Detroit City Council weighs heat protections for people held at the Detroit Detention Center

Detroit City Council’s Public Health and Safety Standing Committee was scheduled to revisit heat mitigation at the Detroit Detention Center on Monday, September 14, after the item was carried forward from the committee’s July 27 meeting.

The review concerns whether temporary cooling measures are adequate and whether the Detroit Police Department can provide the records, thresholds and long-term building plan council members have requested. The available records do not establish that council approved a final heat plan, HVAC project, funding package or implementation deadline.

What council is seeking

The memorandum concerns a request for information from DPD about conditions inside the Detroit Detention Center on Mound Road. Council members have sought complete hourly indoor-temperature records, the heat, humidity or heat-index levels that trigger action, and written protocols describing what staff must do when those thresholds are reached.

Questions also include whether people held at the facility have reliable access to water, ice, cool showers or designated cooling areas. Council members have pressed for a permanent solution, including air conditioning or a broader ventilation upgrade, rather than relying only on portable equipment during extreme heat.

Interim measures at a facility without central air

BridgeDetroit reported in July that the detention center did not have central air conditioning. DPD said it was using portable air coolers, fans, water and ice while staff monitored conditions and the welfare of people held there.

Detroit police Capt. Shelly Eggers told council members that water was being provided every 30 minutes or as needed, bags of ice were distributed, and internal temperatures were tracked hourly through a SmartSheet dashboard. DPD First Assistant Chief Franklin Hayes separately said portable industrial air coolers were being used for the male and female detention areas. He said windows were closed during wildfire-smoke concerns.

Hayes also said DPD was working with the city on plans to improve ventilation and had sent out a quote for an HVAC system. The available reporting did not establish that construction had begun or that a project cost, procurement schedule or completion date had been approved.

Competing accounts of heat and illness

Council Member Denzel Anton McCampbell said he had heard that indoor temperatures reached 102 degrees Fahrenheit and that a person with epilepsy experienced six seizures during a two-week period. Those reports were not independently verified in the July reporting.

Police commission records cited by BridgeDetroit and the Detroit Free Press documented facility temperature peaks of 94 degrees on July 4 and 95 degrees on July 14. Hayes told the police commission he had not seen a reading above the reported three-digit figure. DPD also said it had no record of heat-related illnesses at the detention center.

The differing accounts are why the committee’s requested documentation matters. Hourly records and written thresholds could show what temperatures were recorded, when staff responded and whether the department’s stated cooling measures were applied consistently.

What remains unresolved

The September 14 item was an oversight discussion, not proof that council had approved a permanent heat plan. The unresolved questions include whether DPD provided the requested temperature records, whether it presented written cooling protocols, and whether it identified a responsible official, cost estimate, deadline or procurement path for HVAC or ventilation work.

Those answers affect both people detained at the facility and DPD employees working there. They also could determine whether the city must direct capital funds toward a building upgrade or continue relying on portable cooling equipment.

A draft Detroit Board of Police Commissioners calendar lists a Detroit Detention Center presentation for October 1, but that document says topics may change. Any follow-up should be treated as unconfirmed until it appears on a current official agenda. Until a council or police-commission record identifies a disposition, the HVAC work should be described as proposed or under development—not completed.

Sources

Look for updates to this story

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.