August 28, 2012
We write as organizations
and individuals, both in Arizona and nationally, to oppose Arizona’s planned expansion
of its for profit prison beds. We urge you to immediately cancel the 2,000‐bed
prison RFP and do not award a contract for this procurement. These beds are
unnecessary and costly, and the corporations bidding for the contract all have
histories of mismanagement, abuse, and safety problems—including several
incidents in Arizona prisons already under contract.
Firstly, Arizona does not
need more prison beds, private or otherwise. The state prison population is dropping,
and this decrease is projected to continue. 1 Furthermore, crime
rates are down and thus investing $17 million in a new facility is a poor use
of the state’s limited resources, particularly considering the crippling cuts
to vital services of the last few years.
Years of study by the
Arizona Department of Corrections reveal that for
‐profit prisons are a bad
bargain for state taxpayers. These
studies have shown that, even though the corporate vendors promised the facilities would save the state money, in fact
Arizona is overpaying for its private prisons. A recent investigation showed that many private prisons are
more expensive than their state
‐operated counterparts. This study estimates that Arizona
taxpayers are wasting $3.5 million per year on for ‐profit beds.
2All five of the prison corporations under consideration
have spotty records of poor management, violence
and disturbances, chronic understaffing of facilities, safety lapses, and other
problems. Perhaps most notable is
Management and Training Corporation (MTC), which manages the Kingman state
prison where three prisoners escaped
in 2010, leading authorities on a two
‐week, multi‐state manhunt
culminating in the murder of a couple
vacationing in New Mexico. Investigations after the incident revealed that the alarms in the facility had been
malfunctioning for over a year, but were never fixed.3 After the escapes from Kingman, the Arizona Department of Corrections
conducted security audits of its other
private prisons. At the three GEO prisons ‐ Florence
West, Phoenix West and the Central Arizona Correctional Facility ‐ inspectors found such issues as inmates having
access to a control panel that could open
emergency exits; an alarm system that did not ring properly when doors were
opened or left ajar; and that staff
didn't carry out such basic security practices as searching commissary trucks
and drivers.4 Similar problems were uncovered at MTC’s other
Arizona facility in Marana, where inspectors also found that the swamp coolers were not working (in
August), making it hotter inside the prison than outside. 5
1
Janice K.
Brewer, Executive Budget Summary, Fiscal Year 2013. January 2012:
http://www.azospb.gov/documents/2012/FY2013
‐ExecutiveBudget‐Summary.pdf
2
Isaacs,
Caroline, Private
Prisons: The Public’s Problem. American Friends Service Committee, February, 2012
3
(“Prison
chief says that state didn’t detect prison flaws,” Arizona Republic, 8/19/10
4
“Security
lapses found at all of Arizona’s prisons,” Arizona Republic, 6/26/11
5
Sonberg,
Shelly. Memo to Robert Patton, “Security Assessment—MTC: Marana and GEO:
Phoenix West, Florence
West, and
CACF.” September 22, 2011
Three additional
corporations that do not currently have contracts with the state of Arizona
have also submitted proposals: Corrections Corporation of America (CCA),
Emerald Corrections, and LaSalle. Corrections Corporation of America operates 6
prisons located in Arizona that import prisoners from other states and the
federal government, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). A national
investigation revealed that the company’s Eloy Detention Center had the highest
number of immigrant detainee deaths of any ICE facility.6 The Inspector General for the State of California (which houses
prisoners in CCA’s Red Rock, La Palma, and Florence Correctional Center in
Arizona) slammed CCA in 2010 for serious security flaws and improper treatment
of inmates. Inspectors found faulty alarms and malfunctioning security cameras,
prisoners evading metal detectors, and discovered that CCA was not checking the
arrest records of employees or screening out those with gang affiliations.7 Emerald’s only facility in Arizona is an immigrant detention center
in San Luis. LaSalle
currently operates prisons only in Texas and
Louisiana. Both companies have
had issues in other states where they operate. For a full accounting of the
problems in all five corporations’ prisons, please see the attached
“Rap Sheets,” drawn from
published news accounts.
In their efforts to reduce
operational costs, private prison managers often focus cost
‐containment strategies on personnel and training, the two most
expensive aspects of incarceration. Privately managed prisons generally minimize costs by reducing labor
expenditures, including providing a lower level
of salaries, staff benefits, and professional training. Consequently, there are
higher employee turnover rates in
private prisons than in publicly operated facilities.
This trend is reflected in
Arizona’s existing private prisons. The Department of Corrections’ Biennial
Comparison Review found
that, across the board, all five of the state’s privately managed facilities
had
higher staff turnover and
vacancy rates than publicly managed facilities, and guards frequently scored
lower on core competency
tests. GEO Group’s Phoenix West facility had a 61% turnover rate in 2011 and
MTC’s Marana prison had a
turnover rate of 56.8% that same year.8 Deficiencies in
personnel and programming among
private prison facilities can compromise correctional operations, including
basic safety and security.
Undertrained and inexperienced guards may not be prepared to handle serious
incidents. Security audits revealed that at
the time of the escapes from MTC’s Kingman prison, 80% of the staff were new or newly promoted.9 There is ample evidence to suggest that for
‐profit prison
corporations are not accountable to the citizens
and taxpayers of Arizona. As private companies, they are not subject to the
same transparency requirements or
checks and balances as the Department of Corrections, despite the fact that
they are performing the same functions
and are paid with taxpayer dollars. The public has very little information
about these facilities, or a voice in how
they are run.
And as a result of the
corrections budget bill passed last session, the Department of Corrections is
no longer required to conduct a
biennial comparison review of the cost and quality of these facilities,6 removing
the last shred of public oversight over for ‐profit prisons and leaving lawmakers
with little information on which to base budgetary decisions.
‘Lost and
Ignored’ Tucson
Weekly 2/11/10.
7
“Prison
firm optimistic about Arizona bid despite incidents,” The Arizona Republic, 8/8/11
8
Arizona
Department of Corrections, Biennial Comparison of “Private versus Public Provision of
Services Required
per
ARS §41
‐1609.0
1,”
December 21, 2011
9
Charles
Ryan, “Cure Notice” memo to MTC, December 29, 2010
3
This action recently
prompted Arizona State Legislator Chad Campbell to call on Arizona’s Attorney General
to initiate an investigation into possible violations of state law and/or
contract provisions requiring private prisons to save money and provide the
same or better quality of service as the Department of Corrections. Given the Department’s
own cost studies showing that for ‐profit prisons are more expensive and recent
investigations into safety lapses, staff vacancies, and poor quality of
service, there is substantial basis for such an investigation. It would be
unwise for Arizona to award a contract to a corporation that may later be found
to be violating state law and/or the terms of its existing contracts.
If containing costs is a
goal, changes to sentencing and community supervision can help to further stabilize
Arizona’s prison population and avoid unnecessary expenditures on prison
expansion. The significant decline of Arizona’s prison population is attributed
in part to legislative and probation policy changes enacted in the past few
years that have effectively reduced revocations to prison for technical violations.
A bill passed in the 2012 legislative session expanding eligibility for
diversion programs has the potential to contribute to a further decline in
prison populations. Continuing this trend with additional policy reforms in the
upcoming session could render new beds completely unnecessary, while saving
taxpayers millions and doing more to protect public safety.
The evidence is clear: For
‐profit prisons are costly, ineffective, and are not accountable to the
citizens and taxpayers of Arizona. To invest millions more in this failed
enterprise is throwing good money after bad. We urge you to show strong
leadership and stewardship of public funds. Immediately cancel the2,000 ‐bed
prison RFP and do not award a contract for this procurement.
We appreciate your
consideration and would be pleased to provide further information.
Sincerely,
Arizona
American Civil Liberties
Union of Arizona
American Friends Service
Committee, Arizona Office
Arizona Attorneys for Criminal
Justice
Arizona Ecumenical Council
Arizona Prison Watch
Center for Economic
Integrity
Citizens to Protect
Globe’s Resources
David’s Hope
Justice 4 All
League of Women Voters of
Arizona
NAACP, Arizona State
Conference
NAACP of Maricopa County
National Organization for
Women, Phoenix/Scottsdale
State Representative Cecil
Ash
House Minority Leader Chad
Campbell
State Representative Tom
Chabin
4
State Representative
Debbie McCune Davis
Pima County Supervisor Richard
Elias
State Representative Ruben
Gallego
State Representative
SallyAnn Gonzales
State Representative Katie
Hobbs
Tucson City Council Member
Steve Kozachik
Former Arizona State
Representative Phil Lopes
State Senator David Lujan
State Representative
Catherine Miranda
State Representative
Macario Saldate
Tucson City Council Member
Regina Romero
Tucson Mayor Jonathan
Rothschild
Senate Minority Leader
David Schapira
State Representative Bruce
Wheeler
Bishop Minerva Carcaño,
Resident Bishop of the Phoenix Episcopal Area of the United Methodist Church
Billie K. Fidlin, Chair,
Public Policy Commission, Arizona Ecumenical Council
Anne Morgan
‐Roettger, Parish
Secretary, The Community of Blessed Sacrament
The Rt. Reverend Kirk
Stevan Smith, The Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Bishop Stephen Talmage,
Grand Canyon Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Mark Homan, Pima Community
College Professor (Ret.)
Susan Maurer, New Jersey
Department of Corrections Commissioner, Ret.
Dr. Doris Marie Provine, ASU Professor
David Wells, ASU Professor
National
AdvoCare, Inc.
AFSCME
Citizens for Criminal
Justice Reform
Criminon New Life, DC
Enlace
Grassroots Leadership
Human Rights Defense Center
In the Public Interest
Justice Strategies
Private Corrections
Working Group
The Sentencing Project
Church of Scientology
The Disciples Justice
Action Network
National Advocacy Center
of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd
Presbyterian Criminal
Justice Network
Samuel Dewitt Proctor
Conference
Unitarian Universalist
Association of Congregations
United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society
No comments:
Post a Comment