AFSC, along with our friends at Grassroots Leadership and the Public Safety and Justice Campaign, is participating in a week of coordinated actions to mark the 30th Anniversary of Corrections Corporation of America. We believe that 30 years of profiting from incarceration is nothing to celebrate.

As part of these coordinated actions, we’ve put together a little video birthday card for CCA. Check it out:

Birthday message to CCA

Today, at 4:00 at the Federal Court Building at Congress and Granada in downtown Tucson, we will be holding a demonstration and press conference featuring speakers from national and local organizations. We even got CCA a birthday pinata!

And stay tuned for Part III of the CCA Dirty Thirty series…

This year, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) is celebrating 30 years of profiting from incarceration. CCA was one of the pioneers in for-profit prison management, and today is the world’s largest private prison company.

A publicly-traded company, in 2010, CCA saw record revenue of $1.67 billion, up $46 million from 2009.

Here in Arizona, CCA operates 6 facilities, holding prisoners from Arizona, California, Vermont, and Hawaii as well as federal prisoners. CCA is one of the main beneficiaries of harsh immigrant enforcement and detention policies, such as Operation Streamline. And recently CCA was awarded its first contract to run an Arizona state prison. The first 1,000 beds are set to come online in 2014.

Next week, at its shareholder meeting in Nashville, TN, CCA will be toasting itself with lavish parties hosting rich investors and well-connected lobbyists.

Meanwhile, people around the country say, 30 years of abuse, mismanagement, and political influence peddling is nothing to celebrate.

There will be protests to accompany the shareholder meeting in Nashville, as well as solidarity actions in Washington DC, Ohio, and and here in Tucson, where the AFSC is organizing a rally and press conference on Monday, May 13^th from 4:00-5:00pm at the aptly-named DeConcini Federal Courthouse, 405 W. Congress.

As part of the lead-up to this event, we at Cell-Out Arizona offer our readers a three-part retrospective of CCA’s Dirty 30: Thirty Reasons to Kick CCA Out of Arizona. Enjoy!

CCA’s Dirty Thirty, Part I: The All-Arizona Edition

30. CCA Pays to Play in AZ.

CCA employs Highground Public Affairs Consultants whose president is Governor Jan Brewer’s top political advisor Chuck Coughin. Governor Brewer’s former spokesman, Paul Senseman, was previously employed by CCA, then returned to his lobbying job after leaving the Governor’s office. His wife is currently employed as a lobbyist for the corporation (‘Ties that Bind’ In These Times 6/21/10).

CCA has given money to Governor Brewers past campaigns such as Prop.100 and stands to benefit greatly from SB1070. As more undocumented people are turned over to ICE it is likely that they will be sent to one of CCA’s three detention facilities in Arizona (‘Governor Brewer’s CCA Ties Burn Like Neon’ Phoenix New Times 7/29/10).

And let’s not forget former Senator Dennis DeConcini, a member of the Arizona Board of Regents (which oversees state universities) who also sits on CCA’s Board of Directors. Despite his claims of being a friend to the immigrant community, DeConcini owns upwards of 8,700 shares in CCA or roughly $222,268. Dennis has come under fire from community groups pointing out his own hypocrisy as well as the conflict of interest posed by the competition for state funds between prisons and universities.

29. CCA Greases Palms in Pinal County

CCA pays the Pinal county government based on the number of inmates in one of its prisons in Pinal, as part of an agreement to operate in the county. Last year that amounted to roughly $1.4 million, according to county budget documents. The payments increase as more beds are filled — under the agreement, the county receives two dollars per day for each inmate held in the facility.

The money in part funds the county sheriff’s office, whose enforcement actions have influence over the size of the prisoner population: Under an agreement with the federal government, the office acts as an enforcement agent on immigration law, arresting violators and referring them to federal authorities, who make the ultimate decision on detention. (“Private Prisons Profit From Immigration Crackdown,” Huffington Post, 6/7/12).

28. CCA Guards Participate in Drug Raids on Public High Schools

Guards from Corrections Corporation of America recently assisted local and state law enforcement in two drug raids on public high schools. CCA operates a total of six prisons and detention centers in Pinal County, where the schools are located.

According to an article by Beau Hodai in PR Watch, it was not the first time CCA guards were used in this way, despite the fact that CCA staff are not considered ‘peace officers’ and have no training or certification to allow them to participate in law enforcement activities in Arizona.

After the first incident raised a huge public outcry, the corporation issued a statement that read:

“Our company strives to be a good community partner, and it was in that spirit that local staff responded to the request. Decisions like this are usually made at the facility level. CCA has since reviewed this practice and decided that facilities can no longer provide this type of assistance, for reasons such as liability. Unfortunately, many of the communities where we operate lack these types of resources, but we think this is the appropriate corporate level policy. We’ll continue to support our communities in many other ways.”

However, just a few months later, CCA guards just participated in ANOTHER drug raid on a high school in Pinal County, even after they publicly announced they would not do this. This time, astonishingly, they called it a “teaching lockdown.” After the first report of the raid surfaced, the website quickly removed CCA from the list of participating agencies.

27. More Immigrant Deaths at CCA’s Eloy Detention Center

The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is currently investigating two suicides that occurred in the space of three days at the Eloy Detention Center.

CCA’s Eloy Detention Center, which houses immigrant detainees, had the most deaths of any immigration detention center in the country. According to the ACLU, nine deaths have taken place in Eloy Detention Center–most were caused by inadequate or delayed medical attention (‘Lost and Ignored’ Tucson Weekly 2/11/10).

26. Who’s the Criminal?

A CCA employee pled guilty to drug charges in April 2010 for attempting to give prison inmates cocaine at the Central Arizona Detention Center in Florence (‘Arizona corrections officer caught buying cocaine for inmate’ ABC15 4/21/10).

25. Dead-End Jobs

While correctional officers working for state prisons receive $18-$20 an hour, CCA employees are paid less to do the same job, earning only $10-$12 an hour. CCA employees also receive 240 less hours of training than those employed by ADOC (‘CCA criticized by union, praised by Florence officials’ The Daily Currier 12/18/09)

24. What a Riot!

A prison employee suffered a broken nose and cheekbones as well as eye socket damage during a 30 inmate brawl over an Xbox owned by an inmate at Saguaro Correctional Center (‘Prison Employee seriously injured’ KITV4 7/30/10)

23. Deaths in Custody

A prisoner in CCA’s Saguaro Correctional Center strangled his cellmate while the prison was in lockdown in June 2010. Saguaro houses Hawaiian prisoners in Arizona and was also the site of the stabbing death by two inmates who now face the death penalty in Arizona although Hawaii has no death penalty. Prisoners claim the prison is ‘greatly understaffed.’ (‘HI inmates complain about CCA’ Hawaii News Now 6/17/10).

22. Widespread Prisoner Abuse

A lawsuit filed on behalf of Hawaiian prisoners in CCA’s Saguaro Correctional Center argued that officers stripped and beat prisoners, in some cases hitting their heads against tables while their hands were cuffed behind their backs.  Officers and even the warden threatened the prisoners and their families.  The officials then destroyed the evidence of the beatings, including videotapes, and faslified reports.  An additional suit was filed claiming that beatings and threats have continued in retaliation for prisoners filing the suit (“Private Prison Beatings Continue, Men Say,” Courthouse News, 7/27/11).

21. Unsafe Facilities

The Inspector General for the State of California (which houses prisoners in CCA’s Red Rock, LaPalma, and Florence Correctional Center in Arizona) slammed CCA 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  (“Prison firm optimistic about Arizona bid despite incidents,” The Arizona Republic, 8/8/11).

Stay tuned for Parts II and III of CCA’s Dirty Thirty!

As the August 31st deadline for award of a new private prison contract draws near, there’s been a healthy public debate as to the justification (or lack thereof) of the state’s plan for up to 2,000 more medium security prison beds.

Last week, Tucson Citizen Editor Mark Evans asked the $17 million question: “Private prisons are not saving us money–so why do we still have them?”

Then, Craig Harris of the Arizona Republic put out an excellent and comprehensive analysis of the facts–prison population is down, private prisons cost more–contrasted with the bogus rationale touted by Department of Corrections Director Chuck Ryan to justify their plans to go ahead with the contracts anyway. All you Psychology Majors out there can use this for your term papers on “cognitive dissonance.”

Even Linda Ronstadt took a shot at the for-profit prison industry on CNN’s Situation Room Friday. In a scathing rebuke of Gov. Brewer’s stance on immigration, Ronstadt connected the dots for viewers on the influence of the for-profit prison industry, which manages immigrant detention centers as well as prisons. Ronstadt stated, “…let’s look at the money for a minute. What Arizona is spending an awful lot of money on is private prisons. And Chuck Coughlin and Paul [Senseman]…are two of her top advisers. They are both lobbyists for the Correction Corporation of America, which is the biggest — one of the prison giants, private prison giants in the country.” At this point she was cut off by the host. Go figure.

Finally, a broad coalition of over 50 state and national leaders and organizations sent a letter to Governor Brewer today asking her to halt plans for a new for-profit prison contract. The list of over 50 leaders and organizations includes several Arizona elected officials—both Democrat and Republican—from the state, county and city levels of government. Also signed on to the letter are Arizona groups such as the League of Women Voters, the NAACP, the National Organization for Women’s Phoenix/Scottsdale chapter, and the Center for Economic Integrity.

We are posting the letter in its entirety here, along with the full list of signatories:

State and National Groups Oppose Plan for 2,000 More For-Profit Prison Beds in Arizona

August 28, 2012

Dear Governor Brewer and Director Ryan,

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.[2]

All 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]

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, removing the last shred of public oversight over for-profit prisons and leaving lawmakers with little information on which to base budgetary decisions.

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 the 2,000-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

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

Documents recently obtained by the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) show that the state of Arizona deliberately circumvented and ultimately repealed a state law requiring private for-profit prison corporations to demonstrate cost savings in their bids on new prison contracts. These records reveal that the state was aware that existing private prison contracts were not saving the state money–despite state laws requiring private prison contractors to deliver such savings.

One such statute, ARS 41-1609.01 (G), previously stated:

“A proposal shall not be accepted unless the proposal offers cost savings to this state.  Cost savings shall be determined based upon the standard cost comparison model for privatization established by the Director.”

In response to a public records request, the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC) has confirmed that the “standard cost comparison model” referred to in the statute is the Department of Corrections Operating Per Capita Cost Report (Per Capita Cost Report).

For the past six years, these reports have consistently found that private prisons are not saving the state money, and in many cases, the private beds cost more than equivalent public beds. In fact, an AFSC analysis of ADC Per Capita Cost Reports revealed that between 2008-2010, Arizona overpaid for its private prison beds by $10 million.

Therefore, it would be impossible for a for-profit prison corporation to claim that its proposed prison would save the state money using this data as the basis of the assessment.  But instead of holding the for-profit prison corporations accountable or changing course, the Arizona State Legislature simply began circumventing the law.

The two most recent private prison contracts that have been awarded in Arizona— 1,000 additional beds at Geo Group-operated Central Arizona Correctional Facility (in 2003), and 2,000 additional beds at Management and Training Corporation (MTC)-operated Kingman Cerbat Unit (in 2007)—were deliberately exempted from the both the cost savings and quality review requirements.

The Department of Corrections itself provides the evidence:

“Laws 2003, 2nd Special Session, Chapter 5, Section 15, which authorized the one thousand beds awarded to Central Arizona Correctional Facility (GEO), stated that “Notwithstanding section 41-1609.01, subsections G and K and section 41- 1609.02, subsection B, Arizona Revised Statutes, the director of the department of corrections shall negotiate contracts or amendments to existing contracts for the construction of a total of 1,000 new private prison beds not previously authorized by the legislature, as soon as practicable…”

Similarly, Laws 2007, 1st Regular Session, Chapter 261, Section 8, which authorized the two thousand private beds awarded by contract to ASP-Kingman (MTC) – Cerbat Unit, stated that “…notwithstanding section 41-1609.01, subsections G and K and section 41-1609.02, subsection B, Arizona Revised Statutes, the department of administration shall reissue the revised request for proposals to contract for two thousand private prison beds.”

That one quaint little word, “notwithstanding,” means that the state legislature gave a green light to new private prison contracts without any accountability or expectation that they save money, run safe prisons, or provide a quality of service to the taxpayers footing the bill.

Rather than having to go to the trouble of inserting this exemption into the authorization language of future for-profit prison contracts, the state legislature recently decided to eliminate the cost savings requirement law altogether.

In the 2012 legislative session, the Criminal Justice Budget Reconciliation Act (CJBRA) repealed the sentence in the statute referring to the standard cost comparison model.

But they didn’t stop there.  The bill also repealed a requirement for the state to conduct a quality comparison assessment of public and private prisons.

This statute was the basis of a 2011 lawsuit filed by AFSC seeking to halt the award of a contract for 5,000 new for-profit private prison beds.  AFSC argued that the statute had been on the books since the late 1980’s, but that the statutorily-required assessment had never been completed. While the lawsuit was dismissed on a technical issue of ‘standing,’ the Department of Corrections was compelled to release the first-ever Biennial Comparison Review and cancel the 5,000-bed procurement.

Such a significant concession was deeply embarrassing for the Governor and the Department of Corrections.  The negative press generated by the lawsuit, on top of the scandal generated by the escapes from the Kingman private prison in 2010, amounted to a public relations nightmare.  And the delays and eventual cancellation of the RFP had to be infuriating for the prison corporations, who are investing serious money in their bids for a contract in Arizona.  The removal of the statute was not only necessary to prevent such hiccups in the future, it was also a demonstration of the power of these corporations and state government actors.  The message:  We’re not just above the law, we make the law.

In repealing these requirements, the state legislature has all but admitted that it simply does not care if private prisons are safe, saving money, or providing a quality service. This has only added to the growing pile of evidence that elected officials in Arizona are beholden to the for-profit prison industry. Over the past few years, it has been widely reported that for-profit prison corporations like Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), GEO Group, and Management and Training Corporation (MTC) pour millions of dollars into lobbying and campaign contributions annually in order to secure contracts at the state and federal level.

Several of the key players in the Arizona budget process have accepted contributions from lobbyists, political action committees (PACs) and other individuals/entities associated with for-profit prison corporations. For example:

• Governor Brewer’s campaign manager and top advisor, Chuck Coughlin. Coughlin runs Highground Consulting, which lobbies for CCA in Arizona.
• Paul Senseman, a CCA lobbyist, is also the “spokesman” for Brewer’s PAC
• John Kavanagh, Chair of the House Appropriations Committee, has accepted numerous campaign contributions from lobbyists associated with the for-profit prison industry.  Kavanagh was instrumental in the passage of the 2012 CJBRA.
• House Speaker Andy Tobin has raked in thousands of dollars from lobbyists and others associated with three of the for-profit prison corporations currently bidding on contracts in Arizona. This includes donations from the CEO’s of both GEO Group and GEO Care, as well as the MTC PAC.

Suspecting that the “invisible hand of the market” was behind the effort to remove the cost and quality assessment requirements, muckraking journalist extraordinaire, Beau Hodai, sent a public records request to Kavanagh’s office seeking documents related to the drafting and passage of the budget bill.  [Mr. Hodai, you may recall, was responsible for first revealing the links between CCA and the Governor’s office in relationship to SB1070 for In These Times.]

In response, Hodai received a two-paragraph letter, denying access to records relating to the bill and invoking “legislative privilege.” Because, after all, what good will it do to remove all accountability from the for-profit prison industry if snooping reporters can uncover records relating to influence working behind the scenes through public records law?

The timing of the repeal coincides with plans to award a new contract for 1,000 more for-profit prison beds. The contract for these beds is expected to be signed by September 1, 2012. Funding for the beds was approved in the same budget that removed the accountability provisions.  Many have questioned the wisdom of building prisons we don’t need (the state’s prison population is decreasing) and can’t afford.  After all, the state is barely beginning to come back from a crippling budget deficit.  And where was Arizona supposed to find the funds for a massive prison expansion, anyway?

Soon after the budget passed, the answer was revealed:  The legislature planned to pay for new prison beds by sweeping $50 million from a housing trust containing money from a settlement the federal government negotiated with big banks in the wake of the mortgage crisis.  The monetary aid was intended for states to assist people impacted by foreclosures.  So, essentially the legislature planned to pay for overpriced prisons we don’t need by stealing the money from victims of the housing crisis.  Classy.

On May 24, 2012, The Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest and the William E Morris Institute for Justice filed a lawsuit on behalf of distressed homeowners to prevent the transfer.

So, to recap, private prisons are a waste of money and everybody knows it. But because the corporations pour millions into lobbying and campaign donations, Arizona politicians have adjusted state law to “look the other way”– thus paving the way for future contracts unencumbered by pesky accountability measures and ensuring that the state budget will continue to bleed millions into corrections at the expense of education, health care and social services.

Tune in next week for Part Deux, in which we reveal that the per diem rates for the state’s three oldest private prisons have increased an average of 14 % over 5 years and were recently renegotiated to guarantee 100% occupancy.

Yesterday, the state legislature approved a compromise budget they negotiated with the Governor. 

The budget agreement would:

• Fund 500 state-run maximum security prison beds we don’t need
• Fund 1,000 private prison beds we don’t need
• Pay for these prison beds by stealing $50 million from a mortgage settlement that was intended to provide relief for victims of the foreclosure crisis
• Remove the requirement to study the quality and cost of public vs. private prisons

In his defense of her “don’t bother me with the facts” decision, spokesman Matt Benson said the Governor believes the cost comparison and quality review is, “of little utility to us.”  Our Governor has just publicly stated that she has no use for facts if the facts stand in the way of her corporate backers’ agenda.

There could be no clearer proof that the legislature is putting the interests of their private prison pals ahead of kids, victims of the housing crisis, and the 99%. 

Consider the following: 

House Speaker Andy Tobin took in $5,990 in campaign contributions from individuals or groups associated with 6 different private prison corporations in 2009-2010 alone.  Keep in mind, the maximum individual contribution in Arizona in 2010 was $410 (this year it went up to $430).  The biggest spender was clearly GEO Group, whose lobbyists made 16 contributions worth $3,860.  He also got a hefty donation (the maximum allowed) by the MTC Political Action Committee.  MTC, you may recall, was responsible for the most spectacular prison break in recent memory, resulting in a two week multistate manhunt and the deaths of two people.   

John Kavanagh, Chair of the powerful House Appropriations Committee (which basically drafts the budget), is also on the take.  In the 2010 election cycle, he took in campaign donations from six different individuals associated with private prison lobbying firms, most of them representing GEO Group.  For more information, see our previous post on Kavanagh’s private prison “appropriations.” 

And then there’s our Governor, who has distinguished the state of Arizona in so many ways, including her famous “senior moment” during a televised debate, wagging her bony finger at the President of the United States, and being the puppet of the private prison industry.  As Beau Hodai reported for In These Times, the Governor’s campaign manager is Chuck Coughlin, whose consulting firm Highground lobbies for Corrections Corporation of America.  Her previous Chief of Staff was Paul Senseman, himself a lobbyist for CCA before and after his stint in the Governor’s office.  His wife is also a CCA lobbyist, and was actively lobbying for them while her husband was working for the Gov.  The Arizona Republic has reported on the gobs of cash that CCA threw at the Governor and her pet projects during the 2010 election cycle.

Once you know who’s actually running the state government, it helps to explain the completely irrational behavior of the people who are supposed to be in charge.  Why else would they choose to build prisons we don’t need instead of helping to restore funding for critical state functions that people depend on, like education, health care, and social services?

The Department of Corrections, State Auditor General, and even the Governor have admitted that our prison population is declining.  In 2010 and 2011 we saw the lowest growth rates on record, and the trend is projected to continue.  In other words, we don’t need more prisons.  But private prison corporations need more contracts in order to pay their CEO’s, keep their shareholders happy, fund their lobbyists martinis, and reward their government stooges with fat campaign contributions.

Only catch is, our teeny-tiny surplus doesn’t quite cover the $60 million price tag for more prisons.  Solution?:  Steal the money from victims of the mortgage crisis!  That’s right, the legislature is going to raid the money from the mortgage settlement and put it in the General Fund to pay for prison beds, even though the money is supposed to be used for “state foreclosure prevention programs, Attorney General Office costs and fees, and to remediate the effects of the foreclosure and housing crisis in Arizona.” 

I suppose this applies if you consider one of the “effects of the foreclosure and housing crisis” is that the lobbyists for homebuilders have less cash to spend on legislators than the private prison lobbyists.  Plus, more jobs for the prison construction firms and people who lost their homes can get ‘three hots and a cot’ in a private prison! 

See, it all makes perfect sense once you understand where their priorities truly lie.

This week The Nation features an editorial focused on the folly of private prisons in our infamous state of Arizona.  Sasha Abramsky, who has written extensively on criminal justice and prison privatization issues, exposes the hypocrisy of our legislators:  They say they want to save money and keep the public safe, but when faced with overwhelming evidence that our private prisons do neither of these things, their response is to eliminate the evidence.  Once again, Arizona is a national embarrassment and an example of wasteful and capricious government hubris.

Here’s an excerpt from the article:

“One might think that, faced with evidence that the state isn’t getting enough bang for its buck, Arizona legislators would rethink their commitment to putting ever more prisoners into private facilities. Instead, in a move Orwellian even by the gutter standards of Arizona politics, they’ve simply tried to bar the state from collecting the evidence. On February 27 the legislature proposed a budget bill eliminating the requirement for a cost and quality review of private prison contracts. According to the AFSC, “The move would ensure that the public would have no way of knowing whether the state’s private prisons are saving money, rehabilitating prisoners, or ensuring public safety.”

That’s right, the state legislature has just said, “We don’t care.”  They don’t care if these prisons are safe and they don’t care if they are wasting millions of dollars of your money.  BUT YOU SHOULD CARE.

Recent reports have revealed that private prisons in Arizona cost more overall than equivalent state-operated prison units.   Safety inspection data has revealed widespread safety problems, including malfunctioning cameras and alarms—the same kinds of problems that led to the escapes from Kingman in 2010.  The people of this state simply can’t afford the legislature’s willful ignorance on this issue.

Besides, why wouldn’t they want to know if private prisons are actually saving money?

Why wouldn’t they want to know if these facilities are safe?

Why wouldn’t they want to know if people are being rehabilitated?

We sincerely hope that the voters and taxpayers of Arizona will let the legislators who drafted this “Don’t Bother Me with the Facts” Budget know how they feel about it.

 In the midst of a statewide controversy over private prisons, the Arizona State Legislature’s budget bill released last week eliminates the requirement for a cost and quality review of private prison contracts.  The move would ensure that the public would have no way of knowing whether the state’s private prisons are saving money, rehabilitating prisoners, or ensuring public safety.

The state recently came under fire for not complying with state statute requiring a quality comparison review of the state’s public and private prisons.  After battling a lawsuit over the issue and taking heat from the press, the Arizona Department of Corrections finally issued the first such review in December of 2011.

Cost comparison reviews, also required by statute, have been done every year since 2005 and consistently showed that overall, the state is paying more for private prisons.  A report issued in February by the American Friends Service Committee revealed that the state overpaid for private prisons by more than $10 million between 2008 and 2010.

The report also revealed widespread safety problems in private prisons, including malfunctioning cameras and alarms, holes under fences, and staff who were unable or unwilling to follow procedures.

“It is utterly shocking that when faced with overwhelming evidence of the failure of these prisons, our elected representatives chose not to address the problem, but to eliminate the evidence,” said Caroline Isaacs, Program Director of the American Friends Service Committee’s Arizona office and author of the report.  “It is a disgraceful abdication of their responsibility to safeguard Arizona communities and be good stewards of our tax dollars.”

The move raises further questions about the influence of the private prison industry on Arizona’s elected officials.  Recent investigations, including the one released by AFSC last week, revealed that private prison corporations spend millions of dollars on lobbying and campaign contributions to federal and state officials.

For example, Rep. John Kavanagh, Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, has accepted numerous contributions from people associated with GEO Group, which operates three prisons in Arizona and was bidding on the 5,000 bed prison RFP.  Kavanagh is also a member of ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, which came under fire recently for its connection to private prison corporations and its role in SB1070.   Kavanagh reported gifts from ALEC over $500 to the Secretary Of State in 2011 (the exact amount was not specified).

Stay tuned to Cell Out AZ for more dirt on campaign contributions from private prisons to the legislators deciding the budget.

Isaacs offered that this “pay to play” system is the most likely explanation of the legislature’s actions.  “They’ve just said to the people of Arizona, ‘we don’t care if you are safe and we don’t care if we waste your money.’”

Much has been made of Governor Brewer’s intimate ties to Corrections Corporation of America.  Her Chief of Staff, Paul Senseman, is a former CCA lobbyist, and his wife is currently a lobbyist for the company.  Brewer’s campaign manager and senior policy advisor, Chuck Coughlin, runs a consulting firm that also lobbies for CCA in Arizona.  Brewer accepted a total of $60,000 in contributions from people associated with CCA for her campaign and the tax increase initiative that she was pushing last year.  The scandal made waves after the passage of SB1070, raising questions about CCA’s role in drafting legislation that would potentially provide the company with millions more in contracts for immigrant detention facilities in Arizona. 

But Brewer is hardly the only powerful politician in Arizona with ties to this influential industry.  A Cell-Out Arizona investigation has revealed that John Kavanagh (R-8), Chair of the House Appropriations Committee, has accepted numerous campaign contributions from lobbyists and others associated with Geo Group, the nation’s second largest private prison company and one of the bidders for a contract to build and manage 5,000 new prison beds in Arizona. 

Now we know why Kavanagh is such a staunch supporter of private prisons.  He appeared last week on Phoenix Channel 8’s public affairs program, Horizon, debating the issue with Rep. Cecil Ash.  

In the 2010 election cycle, Kavanagh accepted at least 6 donations from lobbyists associated with Geo Group.  According to Beau Hodai’s investigation for In These Times,

“Geo Group employs consulting firm Public Policy Partners…While Public Policy Partners (PPP), an Arizona-based firm, has more than 30 Arizona clients, it only has two clients at the federal level: Geo Group (based in Florida) and Ron Sachs Communications, a Florida-based public-relations firm that, promotes prison privatization. PPP, as a firm, also appears to be an advocate for expanded use of private prisons. Federal lobbying records show PPP owner, John Kaites, lobbying on behalf of the firm on issues of “private correctional detention management.” 

Kavanagh’s campaign finance reports show that he accepted money from John Kaites as well as Ann Peralta Kaites, John’s lovely wife.  He received his-and-hers matching donations from another husband and wife team, Ken and Laurie Quartermain.  Ken is a lobbyist for Public Policy Partners.  Several other donations came from lobbyists with PPP.

It’s a shrewd move for Geo Group.  Since CCA has bought the Governor’s office, the best way to get those lucrative contracts is to buy off the guy in charge of releasing the money for them—the Chair of Appropriations and outgoing Chair of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee.

In this day and age, most of us can relate to the feeling that our elected officials aren’t really listening to us or acting in our best interests.  But here’s the story of a group of citizens who are actually going to do something about it. 

Citizens Opposed to Globe Becoming a Prison Town has been organizing against a proposed private prison there for almost a year now.  They are one of the most effective and organized yet truly grassroots groups out there.  They have packed City Council meetings with people speaking out against the prison and handed in thousands of signatures of Globe residents on a petition in opposition to the plan.  Yet their City Council and Economic Development Board have refused to listen. 

So they are going to put the democratic process to the test.  They’re going to put the prison up for a vote. 

They have two ballot initiatives in the works.  The first simply says that no new prison can be built in Globe without first being approved by residents through a public vote.  The second requires voter approval for any municipal resource to be spent or utilized for any new prison construction project within, or outside Globe’s jurisdictional boundaries.

It’s a simple concept, but revolutionary in today’s political environment, particularly where these kinds of prison development deals are concerned.  Given the scandals that have recently arisen regarding Arizona politicians on the take (Fiesta Bowl, anyone?) and influence-peddling by corporations in state government (two of the Governor’s top advisors have ties to Corrections Corporation of America), what happens when you put the people BACK in the equation?  What might we learn by exposing these ordinarily backroom deals to the light of day?

The people of Globe are about to find out.  And you can bet that the for-profit prison corporations will be watching very closely to see what happens, because if the people of Globe can do it, so can the people of Florence, or Eloy, or Tucson.  Score one for democracy.

You can read the group’s official press release here:

Public Information/Press Release                                        June 3, 2011

TWO Ballot Initiatives are being launched by Citizens of Globe, AZ who do not want their community to become another rural Arizona Prison Town.

These TWO Ballot Initiatives are closely related, but have distinct purposes.  (see attached)

The first Ballot Initiative is titled, VOTERS MUST APPROVE NEW PRISON IN GLOBE ACT.  It requires Voter approval for any new prison constructed within Globe’s City Limits.

The second Ballot Initiative is titled, NO CITY RESOURCE SPENT ON NEW PRISON ACT.   It requires Voter approval for any municipal resource to be spent or utilized for any new prison construction project within, or outside Globe’s jurisdictional boundaries.

Citizens have launched these TWO Ballot Initiatives because local elected officials refuse to pass a Resolution that would prohibit a 1000 to 2000 – bed proposed private prison from being constructed in the Globe community. 

Nearly a year ago, citizens began speaking out in opposition to a proposed private prison project.  More than 2,500 area residents signed a Declaration of Opposition to such a prison, and implored elected officials to pass a Resolution that would safeguard their community from the private prison ‘industry’.  These elected officials refused to act on behalf of their constituents.  Globe residents continue to ask, “If they don’t represent the citizens of this community, then who do they represent?”  

The Arizona Constitution provides for citizens to “Initiate”, or propose laws or measures that are enacted by a direct vote of the people.  The citizens of Globe are now taking action to accomplish what their elected representatives refused and failed to do. 

Citizens of Globe must gather 582 signatures to place these TWO Initiatives on the ballot at the City’s next regular election in March, 2012.  Registered Voters of Globe, Arizona will ultimately decide the outcome of this very important community issue.

The Committees organizing these TWO Ballot Initiative Campaigns are receiving legal counsel from the Phoenix Law Firm, Perkins Coie, LLP.  Attorney, Rhonda L. Barnes, can be reached at 602-351-8305 or RBarnes@perkinscoie.com.

Jim E. Moss, Committee Chairman

480-540-1279 or mossjim13@hotmail.com

OK, nobody’s pretending that Arizona State Legislators listen to NPR.  But if they did, they might learn that they are about to make a $65 million mistake in awarding contracts for 5,000 more private prison beds in Arizona.  

The reports both focus on the exploits of the GEO Group, the nation’s second largest private prison company and one of the bidders for a lucrative new contract here in Arizona.  Sadly, these problems are not limited to one corporation—there are similar examples on the rap sheets of every for-profit prison operator.  That’s because they all have the same problem:  They are in the business of making money first, and they will always prioritize profits over protecting the public or rehabilitating prisoners.

A two-part expose aired last month lays out two of the inherent risks in handing over corrections to for-profit corporations:

1.  The profit motive trumps rehabilitation
2. Small towns can get left holding the bag for empty prisons when the prison corporations go after more lucrative contracts

The first installment, “Town Relies on Troubled Youth Prison for Profit,” details how a small town became so financially dependent on the Walnut Grove juvenile prison that elected officials, monitors, and other government actors have repeatedly turned a blind eye to rampant abuses against incarcerated youth.  NPR found that the prison is paying the town $15,000 in lieu of taxes, paying $4,500/month to the Correctional Authority, and even “reimbursing” the salary of the corrections employee whose job is to monitor how the prison is run.

Who’s going to let a little sexual abuse, drug trafficking, or medical neglect in comparison get in the way of such a cash cow?  

In the second part of the expose (the amusingly alliterative, “Private Prison Promises Leave Texas Towns in Trouble”), NPR reveals how a small rural town was left on the verge of bankruptcy after GEO Group pulled out of a contract to run their detention center.  To avoid defaulting on the loan they took out to build the prison, the city has “raised property taxes, increased water and sewer fees, laid off workers and held off on buying a new police car.” 

Citizens of towns like Globe, Eloy, Sahuarita, and Benson would do well to study this report.  The story and even the actors may be uncomfortably familiar.  Here’s how it goes:

1.  A guy by the name of James Parkey comes to your town representing a company named Corplan
2. He makes a sales pitch to your Mayor and Council promising a brand-spanking new prison for immigrants, or state inmates, or inmates from another state that won’t cost you a cent to build.  The private operator will finance, construct, and operate the prison and pay off the costs with the money generated by the contracts they get to put inmates in the facility 
3. Your town elders, desperate for jobs and economic development sign on the dotted line
4. Everything is swell until you can’t find any inmates
5. The town is left scrambling to keep from defaulting on the bonds for the prison; the town’s credit rating is down graded making it hard for the town to borrow money for new schools or hospitals;  and drastic measures are taken like raising taxes, laying off workers, and putting off other important projects or purchases

Think it can’t happen here?  Prisoners aren’t as easy to come by as they once were.  Crime is down, and many cash-strapped states turn to sentencing reform to reduce prison populations and save money. 

In some cases, horrendous abuses and lawsuits against the prison corporations have led states to cancel contracts.  This is the case in Hawaii:  That state’s Governor has pledged to pull their prisoners out of a CCA prison in Eloy, Arizona after abuses and deaths in that company’s Saguaro Detention Center came to light.  CCA is currently the largest employer in Pinal County, and is most likely one of the bidders on those 5,000 new beds.     

It’s pretty clear that our state legislators are not listening to the warning signs.  Maybe it was those steak dinners that CCA paid for at the ALEC meeting or the donation checks they got during the last election cycle.  So, that means it’s up to the voters and taxpayers to get the facts and make our voices heard.  Private prisons aren’t good economic development.  They’re a short-sighted boondoggle that could leave our children on the hook for our leader’s poor decisions.