|
Last Updated: Oct 16th, 2008 - 13:33:17 |
Privately owned prisons, a complex arrangement filled with scandal, praise and politicking, have become one of the most well-known and profitable businesses in the U.S. and throughout the world.
Federal and state agencies, in constant struggle with funding and cost avoidance, started looking at the benefits of private prisons during the 1990s, when the U.S. began experiencing a significant increase in their prison population.
During the days of Colorado Governor Roy Romer in the 1990s, there were 1,000 inmates housed out-of-state due to lack of bed space.
"Partnerships with private prisons allowed the state to bring the inmates home," said Alison Morgan, director of private prisons for the Colorado Department of Corrections. "It is not the only solution to managing prisons, but it is a very important facet of managing prison population."
Today there are six privatized prisons in the state of Colorado, holding roughly 21 percent of Colorado's inmates.
Colorado's main impetus toward private prisons is savings for state taxpayers and the hope to bring growth to its still undeveloped, small community towns. Another attraction is the liberation of management from operating and designing correctional facilities. Although they are not altogether disassociated from monitoring by the state, the design, operation, work wages, benefits and rehabilitation programs are left to the discretion of the private contractor.
There is much money to be made in prison operation.
Typically, the state pays private contractors on a daily basis to house prisoners in their facilities. In Colorado, private contractors are paid roughly $54 a day per inmate.
Housing inmates in a state-run facility would require $77 a day.
Using tax-exempt revenue bonds and shareholder money, contractors build their facilities and give the state a break from finding funding for construction costs.
Allegations against for-profit prisons are easier to find than approvals.
"State and taxpayers benefit is the primary hook," said Christie Donner, director for the Criminal Justice Reform Coalition. "What most people don't know is what's not expensive is the construction, it's the annual operation budgets."
There have been discrepancies in small towns across Colorado with private prison corporations. A report filed by the Colorado State Auditor found that the GEO Group, one of the leading prison contractors in the U.S., was conducting alterations in their proposals for building a correctional facility. Bed guarantees were added to their terms and conditions, which meant private prison companies were trying to seek assurance from the state that their facilities would be filled to match the planned occupancy.
Donner said the state is no longer willing to conduct business with the GEO Group due to the problem and change in proposals.
In 2006, GEO tried to propose a plan for the construction of a correctional facility in the town of Ault. Steve Lawrence, a student at the graduate school of public affairs at UCD, wrote an engaging paper about the issues that occurred.
"The prison project ramrod without citizen approval," Lawrence said. "The site was already zoned for commercial use, therefore the town council had authority to approve without vote of the people."
However, the residents of Ault were not buying the corporation's pitch to bring an economic hike to their town and rallied to receive a right of vote by the people. The vote resulted in an end to the prison project.
"GEO did some unequal and nasty deals," Lawrence said.
One of the deals consisted of a $100 million loan to be issued to build the facility.
"(Coloradans) just pay for the services," Lawrence said, but a problem rises when the responsibility of keeping the facility afloat financially lies on the shoulders of the town's residents and taxpayers. Lawrence said the danger to the state lies in if the contractors of the facility should feel their needs are not being met and removes the facility. The town would be stuck with a $100 million loan and 750 convicted criminals.
But Donner believes there are positive impacts to small towns that decide to welcome prisons into their community.
"Most counties receive a revenue from a private prison to fund projects in the county," Donner said. "The revenue is part of the tax-based property."
According to Donner, Bent County has done very well economically with its correctional facility, and the proposal to construct was passed with a 68 percent voter approval.
"It is a definite economic benefit to a community," Donner said.
Another problem illuminated by the state audit is the issue of mismanagement in the operation and conduct of private-run facilities. A report issued by Frank Smith, an investigator and national field organizer for Private Corrections
Institute, showed that in 2004, there were 41 successful escapes nationwide from private prisons.
"They've endangered the public, they have 30 times as many escapes as public prisons and the cost of capturing those escapees is externalized," Smith wrote. "States have rarely recouped the costs."
Concerns were voiced over the design of a private facility in Colorado Springs, Cheyenne Mountain Re-Entry Center, that "poor design and construction of the facility has resulted in problems in managing the inmate population."
Donner maintains that inmates housed in private facilities is a "safe alternative" and they are given medical, educational and rehabilitation programs, the Colorado audit found that the businesses were not complying with methods stated in their contracts.
The audit found that mental health staff was not seeing inmates who have serious mental illnesses within contract-required time and that the DOC has often documented contract violations by the private facility, but failed to enforce terms of the contracts.
Treatment toward employees at private prisons has sparked recognition from both the DOC and organizations like CJRC and PCI. The effects of low wages and poor benefits have been linked to prison riots.
"They've bought off politicians cheaply, who keep voting for this crap," Smith wrote. "They've used financing schemes which have hidden the costs such as lease revenue bonds, certificates of participation, etc., the prisons wind up costing much more, and are of much poorer quality, than if the public just went ahead and paid for them."
|
|
|
