Joint Select Committee on Corrections: final report from the Subcommittee on Long-Term Prison Construction Needs

              JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON CORRECTIONS
FINAL REPORT FROM THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON LONG- TERM PRISON CONSTRUCTION NEEDS
May 31, 1989
Please find attached the recommendations of the Joint Select
committee on Corrections Subcommittee on Long- Term Prison
Construction Needs.
Jim ~ relly, ~ haiban
We agree with the subcommittee recommendations with the
exception of the recommendation that lease purchase be
considered as a funding option for future prison
construction projects.
- Bobby Raymond
Peter Rios
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
M E M O
Distribution List for the
Joint Select Committee on Corrections
Subcommittee on Long- Term Prison Construction Needs Report
HOUSE
Representative Hull, Speaker
Representative
Representative
Representative
Representative
Representative
Representative
Representative
Representative
Representative
Representative
Meredith, Co- chair
Aldridge
Evans
Guenther
Hamilton, Ex- officio
Norton
Raymond
Rosenbaum
Skelly
Wettaw
SENATE
Senator Usdane, President
Senator Mawhinney, Co- chair
Senator Bartlett
Senator Corbet
Senator Denny
Senator Osborn
Senator Patterson
Senator Rios
Senator Stephens
Senator Wright
SUBCOMMITEE MEMBERS
NOTE : The numbers used in RECOMMENDATION # 1 ( pages 2- 4)
were updated for the final report. They now
reflect prison population and projections as of May
31, 1989.
Figure 1 from the draft report was omitted because
it was designed to demonstrate that the prison
system would reach its capacity in April 1989. It
did, thus the figure is no longer relevant.
Finally, a sentence stating that the county jail
district legislation would permit the state to
contract with a county jail district for temporary
services was added to the explanation for
RECOMMENDATION # 4.
JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON CORRECTIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON LONG- TERM PRISON CONSTRUCTION NEEDS
Ob j ect ives
The Subcommittee on Long- Term Prison Construction Needs has
been given three specific tasks:
1. To evaluate prison construction needs over the next
ten years.
2. To determine whether the present construction plan
presented by the Department Of Corrections ( DOC) is
valid.
3. To assess appropriate funding mechanisms for
implementation of the plan.
Subcommittee Recommendations
The subcommittee makes the following recommendations
regarding prison facility construction:
1. The DOC inmate population projections and prison
construction plan appear to be valid and therefore
should be used in the assessment of future
construction projects.
2. Lease- purchase should be considered as an option
for funding the construction of additional prison
facilities.
3. New prisons should be constructed near or adjacent
to existing prisons and on land currently owned by
the State.
4. The establishment of county jail districts should
be supported.
RECOMMENDATION # 1
The DOC inmate population projections and prison
construction plan appear to be valid and therefore
should be used in the assessment of future construction
projects .
Current Inmate/ Prison Bed Status
DOC supplied the Subcommittee on Long- Term Prison
Construction Needs with a variety of data relating to present
and projected prison inmate populations and capacities. ( See
Attachment I. ) According to the data, the total adult
committed population as of May 31, 1989, was 12,732 inmates
including a county jail backlog of 237 prisoners.
Prison inmates are currently being housed in 12,280 permanent
beds and 306 temporary llovercrowdingwb eds. l As of May 31,
1989, the number of adult committed prisoners exceeded the
number of prison beds by 146.2
Projections for Future Needs
Based on its evaluation of prison population data, DOC
projects that the prison population will have a net increase
of 77 inmates per month through December 1990. After this
date, DOC projects the net increase will be 94 inmates per
month. This increase is due to the expected effects of
newly implemented alternative programs. Presently, DOC is
able to draw program participants from both the current
prison population and from those entering the system. DOC
estimates that by December 1990, all eligible prisoners will
be enrolled in the programs. Therefore, participants could
only be drawn from the pool of new incarcerates. DOC
predicts that this will increase the total number of new
Overcrowding beds are cots that have been placed in
available spaces in recreation and living room areas of some
facilities.
Due to the county jail backlog, there are 146 vacant
prison beds. However, 110 of the beds are specifically for
the shock incarceration program, 6 are specifically for death
row inmates, etc. Such beds can only be used for inmates
sentenced to such programs.
inmates incarcerated each month from 77 to 94. This figure
is used by DOC in calculating projections through 2008. l
Assuming that DOCr s population projections are accurate, the
total inmate population at the end of 1998 will be 23,273.
This amounts to an increase of 10,541 prisoners between June
1989 and December 1998. DOC has received funding for an
additional 1,488 prison beds. 288 of the beds are scheduled
to be completed in December 1989. The Department projects
the next 400 will be completed in September 1990, and the
remaining 800 will be completed in March 1 9 9 1 . ~ ~
To keep up with the projected population increase, an
additional 9,199 beds will be needed by January 1999. DOC
has requested funding for an additional 800 beds to be
completed in December 1991, and another 1,600 beds to be
completed by June 1993. Between December 1993 and June 1996,
DOC has requested funding for 3,168 more beds. If all
requested funding is approved the total prison capacity in
July 1996 will be 20,836 beds. 2 The projected population for
that date is 20,443. After July 1996, DOC projects that
approximately 800 new beds will be needed each year. ( See
Figure I.)
All projections are based on the assumption that there
will be no changes to the criminal code that have a
significant effect on the number and length of sentences.
DOC plans to dismantle the 306 temporary beds in March
1991.
DOC projects a shortage of beds during the interim and
has recommended that an additional 1,500 emergency beds be
constructed. The subcommittee on Short- Term Prison
Construction Needs is currently addressing this problem.
Assuming that the 1,450 emergency beds are funded.
Figure I
10- Year Projected Population vs. capacity1
( Including Funded and Requested Beds)
1989 - 1998
To keep up with the projected population increase, DOC has
recommended that the current prison capacity of 12,586 be
increased to approximately 22,436 by 1998. This represents a
ten- year increase of 9,850 beds; 8,362 of the beds have not
been funded.
DOC Projection/ Plan Analysis
DOC Proiections - The subcommittee recognizes that the number
of variables involved in predicting future prison populations
are such that an exact determination of future populations is
not possible. Based on the fact that DOC has provided
acceptable prison population projections in the past, and
that they are the entity best suited to generate such
projections, the subcommittee accepts DOC'S recommendations
with the following reservations:
The subcommittee notes a lack of consistency in
population data submitted by DOC. For example, data
released in March used population projections for
Department of Corrections memo, April 20, 1989.
4
February that projected February's population at 176
inmates more than it actually was. The projections had
not been recalculated to reflect actual prison
population. This indicates DOC'S projections may be
high. ( See Attachment 11.)
In addition, DOC'S projections for the net monthly
population increase tend to vary significantly over
time. In August 1988, the Department projected a net
increase of 108 prisoners per m0nth. l In November 1988,
the Department projected a net increase between 71 ( if
early release programs were functioning at 100%) and 124
( assuming no early release programs). As of January
1989, DOC projects a net increase of 77 inmates per
month.
DOC'S Construction Plan - The subcommittee has reviewed and
accepts DOC'S planned prison construction and expansion
through 1998. The plan submitted by DOC encompasses a 20-
year period. The subcommittee, however, is hesitant to
support the plan beyond a ten- year period, subject to further
review at a later date. The first ten years of the plan4
call for construction of an additional 9,850 beds between
1989 and 1998. Although approximately 3,822 beds can be
built by expanding existing facilities, new sites must be
identified to accommodate the remaining beds. DOC is
currently considering building 10,000 new adult beds in the
Florence area and 840 juvenile beds at various Pinal County
sites. In addition, DOC plans to construct 1,800 DWI adult
beds throughout the state and 450 community release beds in
Pima and Maricopa counties. The plan recommends, and the
subcommittee endorses, that designs previously used for
prison and juvenile institution construction projects be re-used
as prototypical designs for future facilities.
Further, in light of the State's current and projected fiscal
situation, the subcommittee recommends that DOC use the most
cost- efficient architectural designs available while still
Arizona Department of Corrections Twenty Year Plan:
1987- 2006, Updated August 1988: 1988- 2006.
Minutes of Joint Select Committee on Corrections,
November 21, 1988.
Arizona Department of Corrections Alternative Prison
Site Analysis, Book 1, January 31, 1989.
Arizona Department of Corrections Twenty Year Plan,
1987- 2006, Updated August 1988, 1988- 2008.
providing for maximum security and safety.
RECOMMENDATION # 2
Lease- purchase should be considered as an option for
funding the construction of additional prison
facilities.
Based on the current status of the general fund and the
projected revenues to the Corrections Fund, the subcommittee
recommends that lease- purchase be considered for funding of
future prison construction projects.
General Fund - The subcommittee does not feel that an
appropriation from the general fund for prison construction
is feasible at this time. Current statewide expenses already
exceed the amount of revenues that are collected for deposit
into the fund.
The Corrections Fund - The subcommittee expresses its
concern regarding the ability of the Corrections Fund to
adequately cover the construction costs of additional
corrections facilities.
The Corrections Fund, established in 1984, is used to
construct, purchase, renovate, and convert correctional
facilities, and to maintain and operate corrections
facilities with legislative approval. The Fund consists of
monies collected from the luxury taxes specified in A. R. S.
42- 1204. Under current statute, the fund has an expiration
date of June 30, 1994.
The ending balance in the Correction Fund for FY 1988 was
$ 9,754,000. Adding an estimated revenue of $ 22,493,900 for
FY 1989, the total amount available for FY 1989 is
$ 32,247,900. DOC has received approval to spend $ 31,922,200
for the construction of 1,200 prison beds and for drug
enforcement activities. This will leave a balance of
$ 325,000 in the Fund.
JLBC estimates that the Fund will receive $ 22,500,000
annually over the next five years. If this estimate is
correct, the Fund will have a balance of $ 22,825,700 at the
end of FY 1990. Expenditures from the Fund totaling
$ 18,513,000 have already been approved for FY 1990, leaving a
balance of $ 4,312,700.
If DOC funding requests as of March 1989 are approved, the
Fund will be approximately $ 88 million dollars in debt by
the end of FY 1990, and approximately $ 204 million dollars in
debt by the end of FY 1994. l Current Correction Fund
revenues will not be adequate to cover estimated prison
construction costs for the next five years. ( See Figure 11.)
Figure I1
Requested Funding vs . Construction Fund ~ evenues~
( Cumulative) 1989 - 1994
Benefits of Lease- Purchase - Considering the current status
of traditional prison construction funding sources, one
advantageous aspect of lease- purchase is that money need not
be supplied up front. Rather, a project is backed by
financiers who charge the State a prearranged annual fee for
a set period of time. After such time, ownership of the
facility and/ or property is transferred to the State.
Overview: Correction Fund, Joint Legislative Budget
Committee staff, March 1, 1989. See Attachment 111.
Overview: Corrections Fund, Joint Legislative Budget
Committee staff, March 1, 1989.
One concern regarding lease- purchase, or any type of payment
over- time plan, is that the lessee ultimately pays more for
the project than would have been required if it had initially
been paid for in full. However, it can be argued that the
value afforded by both increased and more timely usage of the
project effectively counters the added costs.
The subcommittee considered two forms of lease- purchase:
traditional lease- purchase and " turn- keytt lease- purchase.
Traditional lease- purchase involves separate bidding for each
aspect of the project, such as financing, design,
construction, etc. In a ttturn- keytlte ase- purchase project ,
one company is selected through the bidding process, and that
company is responsible for all aspects of the project. ( See
Attachment IV for additional information regarding lease-purchase
programs.)
According to the Attorney General's Office, current Arizona
statute permits the traditional form of lease- purchase.
However, the statutes do not permit a turn- key lease- purchase
program. In order to use a turn- key approach, the
Legislature would have to amend the procurement code which
requires that all phases of a project be bid separately. An
amendment was attached to Senate Bill 1452 which does this.
The bill passed the House and is awaiting final Senate
approval. ( See Attachment V for language.)
RECOMMENDATION # 3
New prisons should be constructed near or adjacent to
existing prisons and on land currently owned by the
State.
The subcommittee feels that future prisons should be located
near or adjacent to existing prisons and should be built on
land that is currently owned by the State. The subcommittee
supports the idea of land utilization without a rent
requirement.
State Land - According to the State Land Department, " State
Landsw are actually State Trust lands. State Trust lands are
lands that were granted to the State by the Federal Enabling
Act. The State can lease or sell the lands to raise revenue
for public schools, universities, prisons, or other public
institutions.
Although there is a mechanism by which a State agency can be
assured of the right to use a particular parcel of Trust
land, such land cannot be given to or used free of charge by
the State for the construction of prisons or other public
institutions. Because monies received from the rental or
sale of State Trust lands are used to fund the budgets that
the Legislature authorizes for Trust beneficiaries, the
agency must pay fair- market value to purchase or use the
land.
The only exception to this requirement exists when the State
agency is both the beneficiary and the user of a parcel of
Trust land. For example, if DOC builds a prison on
Penitentiary Trust land, it must obtain a lease on the land
from the Land Department. An annual rental charge is
assigned to the lease, but is subsequently offset by a
corresponding beneficiary credit. Therefore, no rent money
is actually paid to the Penitentiary Trust Fund. The
Penitentiary Trust forgoes the option of generating income by
having the land leased to some other party, but DOC is able
to use the land rent free for a prison site. ( See Attachment
VI for memo from the State Land Department.)
Penitentiary Trust Land - The State has 9.6 million acres of
State Trust land. l Each Trust land parcel is assigned to a
specific Trust; 81,534 acres, or approximately 1% of State
Trust Land, are assigned to the penitentiary grant. Most of
the penitentiary grant lands are in remote and rural areas
that lack water, utilities, and public access, and are poorly
suited for prison sites.
However, the State does have the option of making
Itbenefi ciary exchange^^^ in which the Trust beneficiary that
is assigned to a specific land parcel is switched to another
Trust land parcel in a different area. All beneficiary
exchanges must be approved by the State Selection Board which
consists of the Governor, the Attorney General, and the State
Treasurer.
Penitentiary beneficiary status can be given to Trust lands
that are suitable for specific DOC purposes, thus enabling
DOC to use the land rent- free. Beneficiary exchanges were
used to accomplish the rent free goal for the Adobe Mountain,
Perryville and Globe prison facilities.
The State Land Department provided the subcommittee
with county maps that outline State Trust land. Maps can be
obtained from House Judiciary staff.
RECOMMENDATION # 4
The establishment of county jail districts should be
supported.
The subcommittee supports the establishment of county jail
districts. Although the county jail district legislation is
not specifically designed to alleviate overcrowding problems
within the State corrections system, it does permit the state
to contract with a county jail district for temporary
services.
The legislation would allow county boards of supervisors to
establish a county jail district. The purpose of the
district would be to acquire, construct, operate, maintain
and finance county jails and jail systems. Upon approval by
the voters, a district could levy a transaction privilege tax
or a secondary property tax. l Monies collected would be used
to support the jail district above the maintenance- of- effort
expenses.
l~ he type of revenue enhancement mechanism used would
be mandated by the county's population.
10
Attachments
Attachment Title
I Arizona Department of Corrections: Prison Capacity
and Population Projections
I1 Department of Corrections monthly memo to Governor
Mofford and Department of Corrections memo to
Representative Skelly
I11 Joint Legislative Budget Committee Overview of
corrections Fund
IV Lease- Purchase - Southern Correctional Service and
OPUS Corporation
V Proposed Language to Amend Procurement Code
VI Arizona State Land Department memo: State Lands for
Prison Sites
Attachment I
Arizona Department of Corrections:
Prison Capacity and Population Projections
ROSE MOFFORD
GOVERNOR
1601 WEST JEFFERSON
PHOENIX ARIZONA 85007
( 602) 542- 5536
SAMUEL A. W I S
DIRECTOR
April 27, 1989
The Honorable Jim Skelly, Chairman
Judiciary Comnittee
Arizona House of Representatives
1700 West Washington - House Wing
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Dear Representative Skelly:
The attached, updated information is being forwarded t o you for the purpose
of f a c i l i t a t i n g the work of the Subcommittee on long- term construction
needs.
Please f e e l f r e e t o contact my o f f i c e f o r any a d d i t i o n a l o r c l a r i f y i n g
information you might require.
ARIZONA OF CORRECTIONS
ADULT INSTm1ONs POPULATION PEIDJM3TIONS
AND C O N r n I ( = N NEEDS
Population Projections: The projection base has been revised to begin with a
March 31, 1989, actual population count and includes a l l inmates in the
physical custody of the Department plus those sentenced inmates awaiting
transfer from the county jails. The " outside count" ( inmates temporarily out
to court, in hospitals, or on furlough) has been deleted from the
projections. As the daily outside count numbers remain fairly constant as a
function of the Average Daily Population (- 8 to 1.0%) and as these inmates
are not physically occupying a bed while on outside count status, the
Degartment has determined that they should not be included in projection
figures which have the primary purpose of establishing future bed needs.
Inmates on outside count status will, however, continue to be included in the
Average Daily Count which is used in calculating the Department's daily
operating budget .
The forecast model used by the Department shows that we can expect a monthly
increase of 94.4 inmates over at least the next ten- year period. To account
for impacts on the population growth r a t e brought about as a r e s u l t of
implemented diversionary programs ( Home Arrest, Shock Incarceration, Work
Fwlough, and Early Parole) the projected monthly increase has been reduced
to 77.4. This reduction ( impact of diversionary programs) is predicted to
continue tlrough December, 1990, when their maximum impact w i l l have been
realized. At that time, and with all other present factors remaining equal,
the net monthly increase w i l l return to 94.4, or 1,133 per year.
Construction Needs: The enclosed Bed Addition Schedule ccmpares the
population projections to the anticipated occupancy dates for new facilities.
A l l 1,788 interim/ emergency beds requested for funding during this session
are delineated in items " a- e" of the Schedule. I t e m s " f" and " g" are the two
units approved for funding on July 1, 1988. Remaining beds requested in this
Schedule ( i t e m s " h- n" ) represent the Revised Five Y e a r Capital Request for
new adult i n s t i t u t i o n s . The capacities of each unit being requested
accurately r e f l e c t the designated design capacity for prototypical
facilities. Level 3 units are identical to the level 2 prototypical unit
with the exception of having additional perimeter security.
Anticipated occupancy dates for the 1,788 interim beds and the 1,200 funded
in July, 1988, have been established according to r e a l i s t i c construction
completion dates. This " fixed" schedule allows for a 6- month delay in the
previously scheduled completion date for the 800 level 4 beds at Florence--
the f i r s t scheduled unit in the Revised Five Year Capital Request. This
delay permits the bulk of monies required for construction to be stalled
until FY 1991. However, to ensure timely completion and coordination with
existing and planned units, funds for professional services, preliminary
construction and a central kitchen must be appropriated in FY 1990.
- i r : Adult Institutions Populations Project ions
and Construct ion Needs
Page Two
It should be noted that no new facilities are listed beyond July, 1996. The
specific security level of f a c i l i t i e s needed beyond 1996 w i l l be determined
annually, beginning with the FY 1991 five year request and dependent upon the
projected classification mix of inmates.
Throughout the Bed Addition Schedule there has been a devoted effort to both
l i m i t the backlog of inmates in county jails and restrict the bed surplus to
no more than what would naturally occur when a new unit is opened for
occupancy.
ARIZONA DEPAR'mEMc OF C O ~ C N S
BED ADDITION SQIEDULE
by
Ncanber, Level, Location, and Anticipated Occupancy Date
306 Overcrowding beds
96 Level 2, Winslow
96 Level 2, Safford
96 Level 2, Winslow
50 Level 2, Winslow
250 Level 2, Yuma
400 Level 3, Yuma
400 Level 3, Safford
400 Level 3, Winslow
400 Level 4, Winslow ( Funded 7- 1- 88)
800 Level 4, Florence ( Rxlded 7- 1- 88)
* Deactivate 306 overcrowding beds
800 Level 4, Florence
800 Level 3, Florence
800 Level 3, Florence
768 Level 5, Florence
800 Level 4, Florence
800 Level 4, Florence
800 Level 3, Florence
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION TIME ESTIMATES ON POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Population Operating
Month Projection Capacity
Surplus/
Deficit
Note: Population projection includes month- end inside count and county
jail backlog, and reflects a projected net monthly increase of 77.4
inmates as a result of impact of alternative programs. The net monthly
increase will return to 94.4 in January, 1991.
Revised 4- 21- 89
Month
Population
Projection
Operating
Capacity
Surplus/
Deficit
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Bureau of Offender Services
ADULT and JUVENILE COMMITTED POPULATION
Page 1 of 2-
CAPACITY INSIDE COUNT OUTSIDE COUNT
FACILITY OPER SP USE P+ R+ T SP USE TOTAL FRLO HOSP CT/ JAIL
Cochise
Gila
Maricopa
Mohave
ASPC- DOUGLAS
Central Unit
CU/ Inf irm
CU/ Death Row
CU/ PC
Ad Seg Unit
East Unit
Shock Incarc
North Unit
South Unit
SMU
SPU
WP - F
Picacho
ASPC- FLORENCE
Santa Cruz
San Juan
San Pedro
Santa Maria
sola at ion
ASPC- P'VILLE
Reception
Permanent
Flamenco MHC
ACW
ASPC- PHOENIX
Cimarron
Echo
Rincon
Rincon/ Minor
Rincon/ Health
Santa Rita
Cmplx Detent
ASPC- TUCSON
Page 2 of 2-
CAPACITY INSIDE COUNT OUTSIDE COUNT
FACILITY OPER SP USE P+ R+ T SP USE TOTAL FRLO HOSP CT/ JAIL
Coronado Unit 250 230 230
Kaibab Unit 400 382 382
Cmplx Detent 36 23 23
ASPC- WINSLOW 650 36 612 23 635
ASP- FT GRANT 503 25 598 16 614
ASP- SAFFORD 384 370 0 370
ASP- YUMA 250 8 231 4 235
MALE SUBTTL 10,870 386 10,566 390 10,956
FEMALE SUBTTL 678 12 687 5 692
TOTAL BOTH 11,548 398 11,253 395 11,648
NACRC 126 127 0 127
SACRC 116 4 124 124
RELEASE CNTKS 242 4 251 0 251
Aspen 200 244 0 244
Papago 250 241 0 241
New Dawn 40 2 15 15
DWI CENTERS 490 2 500 0 500
TOTAL MALE 11,562 390 11,302 390 11,692
TOTAL FEMALE
TOTAL BOTH 12,280 404 12,004 395 12,399
Total inmates in County jails awaiting admission:
JUVENILES
AMJI 376 12 369 13 382
CMJI 168 20 147 16 163
BCJI 120 6 82 2 84
PMJI 140 6 117 11 128
AJI 40 2 18 18
TOTAL 844 46 733 42 775
End of Last Month
Adult Juvenile
Arizona Parolees 1,052 602
Inter- State Parole/ Prob 1,185 60
Work Furloughees 52
Home Arrestees 16
Admin Releasees 703
TOTAL 3,008
ROSE MOFFORD
GOVERNOR
1601 WEST JEFFERSON
PHOENIX. ARIZONA 85007
( 602) 542- 5536
SAMUEL A. LEWIS
DIRECTOR
April 21, 2989
Catherine R. Eden
Ddrector
Department of Administration
State Capitol/ W. WingjRoom # 801
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, A2 85007
Dear Ms. Eden:
Consideration of the impact of programs such as community
punishment and intensive probation on this agencyts growth,
as well as the potential approval of up to 1788 interim beds,
requires the Department of Correctians to revise its current
5 year Capital Renewal Request. Although the Department's
population projections are accurate regarding past intake and
release practices and equate to 77 additional inmates per
month through 12/ 31/ 90 and 94 inmates per month thereafter,
there is much speculation on the impact of the community
punishment and intensive probation issues. Since the
Department does not have a prior history for these programs,
it is impossible to accurately predict their impact on the
Department's growth and bed requirements.
The Department's current 5 Year Capital Renewal Request
reflects the funding required for all continued bed needs
beyond the interim beds being considered for funding by the
legislature. The Department originally requested $ 5,424,000
for Architectural and Engineering fees for the 800 and 900
bed prisons as well as $ 28,336,000 for construction of the
800 bed prison in Fiscal Year 1990. However, the minimum
funding required for adult beds in July, 1989 is $ 6,499,000-
This total includes :
Professional Svcs. - 800 Beds- Level IV $ 2,464,000
Construction & Equip/ Central Kitchen $ 2,035,000
Const. Funds/ Site Prep/ Fencing/ Gen.
Building Construction $ 2,000,000
TOTAL $ 6,499,000
The new 800 bed prison at Florence, currently scheduled for
completion in July 1991, could be delayed until January,
1992. The Department will experience a deficit of 340 beds
prior to opening this prison in January, 1992.
~ atherine R. Eden
April 21, 1989
Page 2
Attached is a copy of the current and revised 5 Year Capital
Renewal Request as well as a copy of the Department of
Corrections' population projections, which has been revised
by deleting the monthly out- count. Due to the critical need
for beds, this information should be forwarded to the JLBC at
your earliest convenience.
In the interim, the Department intends to begin a tracking
system to capture data relative to the community punishment
and intensive probation issues. This information would be
reported every six months, beginning October, 1989. It is
hoped that this data will help the Department assess the
impact of these programs and provide a more accurate time
frame of when additional beds will be required.
Additional infarmation on this matter will be provided to
your office as it becomes available. If you have any
questions, please call me at 542- 5498.
Sincerely,
Samuel A. Lewis
Director
Attachments
cc: Stanley F. Bates, Asst. Director, Administration
JC Keeney, Asst. Director, Adult Institutions
Rex Herron, ADC Strategic Analyst
Dr. Darryl Fischer, ADC Planning Bureau
Tony Zelenak, Administrator, Facilities Management
Don Horne, Administrator, Management and Budget
Les Marquis, DOA Asst. Director, Facilities
Steve Conner, DOA Project Manager, Facilities
Doug Tucker, EBO
Jim Stewart, JLBC
TABLE
ARmma DEPAR! K! Em OF CmREmCWS
- REVISE- D FI- VE YE- AR C APITAL REC? JESl! - NEW ADULT IN- ONS
PS= 2,464
ASPC- F/ Cmplex I1 C= 2,000
800 Bed- Level IV CK= 2,035 24,301 ------- ------- -------
BSPC- F/ Ccmplex I1 PS= 2,740
800 Bed- Level I11 ------- C= 2,000 18,140 ------- -------
ASPC- F/ Canplex III
800 Bed- Level 111 ------- PS= 2,740 20,140 ------- -------
ASPC-~/ complex1 11 PS= 5,522
768 Bed- Level V - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C= 5,000 37,478
ASPC- F/ COO~~~ 1~ 1X1 PS= 2,464
800 Bed- Level N ------- ------- ------- C= 2,000 24,301
OCCUPBNCY
- DATE
Total New
Adult Institutions 6,499 31,781 48,802 44,406 55,066 = $ 186,554
Total New Adult
Beds Requested 800 1600 768 1,600 800 = 5,568
Assuinptions :
1. Juvenile bed needs remain the same.
2. 192 beds are on line by 12/ 1/ 89
3. 146 beds are on line by 1/ 1/ 90
4. 1450 enlergency beds are funded by separate appropriation by 5/ 1/ 89
5. 400 appropriated new beds are on line a t Winslow by 10/ 1/ 90
6 . 800 appropriated new beds are on line a t Florence by 4/ 1/ 91
7. The Department experiences gmwth a t the eate of 77.4 new inmates per month though
12/ 31/ 90, when the growth of 94.4 per mnth net increase occnrrs.
8. Changes in the criminal code, statutes, or trends in the current incarceration rate
w i l l not occur
9. No privatization beds are considered.
KEY: PS = Professional Services
C = Construction
CK = Central Kitchen
Prepared: 4/ 20/ 89
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Bureau of Offender Services
\ - ADULT and JUVENILE COMMITTED POPULATION
Y
Page 1 of 2-
-' w- yG'
CAPACITY INSIDE COUNT OUTSIDE COUNT
FACILITY OPER SP USE P+ R+ T SP USE TOTAL FRLO HOSP CT/ JAIL
Cochise
Gila 600
Maricopa 118
Mohave 800
ASPC- DOUGLAS 1,518
Central Unit
CU/ Inf irm
CU/ Death Row
CU/ PC
Ad Seg Unit
East Unit
Shock Incarc
North Unit
South Unit
SMU
SPU
WP- F
Picacho
ASPC- FLORENCE
Santa Cruz 468
San Juan 468
San Pedro 216
Santa Maria 248
Isolation
ASPC- P'VILLE 1,400
Reception 238
Permanent 16
Flamenco MHC 200
ACW 250
ASPC- PHOENIX 704
Cimarron 744
Echo 206
Rincon 471
Rincon/ Minor 20
Rincon/ Health - Santa Rita 654
Cmplx Detent
ASPC- TUCSON 2,095
Page 2 of 2-
CAPACITY INSIDE COUNT OUTSIDE COUNT
FACILITY OPER SP USE P+ R+ T SP USE TOTAL FRLO HOSP CT/ JAIL
Coronado Unit 250 236 236
Kaibab Unit 400 395 395
Cmplx Detent 36 26 26
ASPC- WINSLOW 650 36 631 26 657
ASP- FT GRANT 503 25 608 20 628
ASP- SAFFORD 384 373 0 373
ASP- YUMA 250 8 229 2 231
MALE SUBTTL 10,870 386 10,682 414 11,096
FEMALE SUBTTL 678 12 684 3 687
TOTAL BOTH 11,548 398 11,366 417 11,783
NACRC 126 120 0 120
SACRC 116 4 122 122
RELEASE CNTRS 242 4 242 0 242
Aspen 200 206 0 206
Papago 250 245 0 245
New Dawn 40 2 19 19
DWI CENTERS 490 2 470 0 470
TOTAL MALE 11,562 390 11,375 414 11,789
TOTAL FEMALE 718 14 703 3 706
TOTAL BOTH 12,280 404 12,078 417 12,495
Total inmates in County jails awaiting admission:
JUVENILES
AMJI 376 12 401- 18 419
CMJI 168 20 159 13 172
BCJI 120 6 90 90
PMJI 140 6 110 15 125
AJI 40 2 26 26
TOTAL 844 46 786 46 832
End of Last Month
Adult Juvenile
Arizona Parolees 1,060 530
Inter- State Parole/ Prob 1,115 62
Work Furloughees 63
Home Arrestees 32
Admin Releasees 616
TOTAL 2,886
Corrected Copy
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Bureau of Offender Services
ADULT and JUVENILE COMMITTED POPULATION
r-
\- .. \<* . -,\" \;:, Page 1 of 2-
CAPACITY INSIDE COUNT OUTSIDE COUNT
FACILITY OPER SP USE P+ R+ T SP USE TOTAL FRLO HOSP CT/ JAIL
Cochise
Gila 600
Maricopa 118
Mohave 800
ASPC- DOUGLAS 1,518
Central Unit
CU/ Inf irm
CU/ Death Row
CU/ PC
Ad Seg Unit
East Unit
Shock Incarc
North Unit
South Unit
SMU
SPU
WP- F
Picacho
ASPC- FLORENCE
Santa Cruz
San Juan
San Pedro
Santa Maria
Isolation
ASPC- P'VILLE
Reception
Permanent
Flamenco MHC
ACW
ASPC- PHOENIX
Cimarron 744
Echo 206
Rincon 471
RinconIMinor 20
Rincon/ Health
Santa Rita 654
Cmplx Detent
ASPC- TUCSON 2,095
Page 2 of 2-
CAPACITY INSIDE COUNT OUTSIDE COUNT
FACILITY OPER SPUSE P+ R+ T SPUSE TOTAL FRLOHOSP CT/ JAIL
Coronado Unit 250 233 233
Kaibab Unit 400 388 388
Cmplx Detent 36 16 16
ASPC- WINSLOW 650 36 621 16 637
ASP- FT GRANT 503 25 614 12 626
ASP- SAFFORD 384 345 0 345
ASP- YUMA 250 8 226 5 231
MALE SUBTTL 10,870 386 10,632 424 11,056
FEMALE SUBTTL 678 12 696 2 698
TOTAL BOTH 11,548 398 11,328 426 11,754
NACRC 126 119 0 119
SACRC 116 4 113 113
RELEASE CNTRS 242 4 232 0 232
Aspen 200 195 0 195
Papago 250 248 0 248
New Dawn 40 2 13 13
DWI CENTERS 490 2 456 0 456
TOTAL MALE 11,562 390 11,307 424 11,731
TOTAL FEMALE 718 14 709 2 711
7
TOTAL BOTH 12,280 404 12,016 426 12,442
Total inmates in County jails awaiting admission:
JUVENILES
AMJI 376 12 369 15 384
CMJI 168 20 161 11 172
BCJI 120 6 87 87
PMJI 140 6 115 9 124
A J I 40 2 25 25
TOTAL 844 46 757 35 792
End of Last Month
Adult Juvenile
Arizona Parolees 1,052 602
Inter- State Parole/ Prob 1,185 60
Work Furloughees 52
Home Arrestees 16
Admin Releasees 703
TOTAL 3,008 662
Attachment I1
Department of Corrections Monthly memo to Governor Mofford
and Department of Corrections memo to Representative Skelly
NOTE: Two memos released by DOC within five days of each
other appear to have conflicting numbers. The projected
population for the month of February is significantly higher
then the actual population for that month.
The memo to Governor Mofford ( dated March 15, 1989) states
that the total adult committed population in February was
12,370.
The memo to Representative Skelly ( dated March 10, 1989)
projects prison populations beginning in December 1988. Each
month's population projection builds upon the month before
it. February's projection is 12,702, 332 more inmates then
were actually committed as of February.
According to a DOC spokesperson, the actual number of
committed inmates in February excludes approximately 154
inmates who were being housed in county jails. This figure
is included in the projection. Adding 156 to 12,370 results
in an actual committed population of 12,526 - still 176
inmates short of the projection.
ROSE MOFFORD
GOVERNOR
1601 WEST JEFFERSON
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007
( 602) 542- 5536
SAMUEL A. LEWIS
DIRECTOR
DISTRIBUTION LIST
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
Mr. George Cunningham, Chief of Staff
Ms. Joyce Geyser, Assistant Chief of Staff
Mr. Donald Olson, Special Assistant to the Governor
Mr. Fred Bochman , Legislative Liaison
Mr. Howard Boice, Press Secretary/ Special Assistant
ARIZONA STATE SENATE
M r . Richard Bittner, Majority Staff DFrector/ Legal Counsel
Ms. Martha McConnell Bush, Special Assistant to the Majority
Ms. Amy Wainwright, Minority Legal Counsel
Ms. Kim Baker, Minority Financial Analyst
Ms. Patricia Trebesch, Judiciary C d t t e e Analyst/ Counsel
Ms. Liz Harris, Government C d t t e e Analyst
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. Rick Collins, Administrative Officer
M s . Cindy Kappler, Judiciary C d t t e e Analyst
Mr. Jeff Grant, Public Institutions Camnittee Analyst '
Ms. Julie Klein, Special Assistant, Majority
M r . Eric Henderson, Minority Legal Counsel
Mr. Paul Pugmire, Administrative Assistant to the Minority Leader
Mr. Mark Bogart, Minority Research Econanist
@, Gno , - Minority Staff Director
JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET Ccf4MITTEE
Mr. Ted Fems , Staff Director
Mr. Dick Morris, Assistant Staff Director
Mr. Jim Stewart, Senior Capital Review Analyst
EXECUTIVE B W T OFFICE
Mr. Peter Burns, Executive Budget Office Director
M r . Doug Tucker, Senior Budget Analyst
( For additional information on attached m t e r i a l , contact the Department
of Corrections, office of Legislative senrices, 542- 3133).
ROSE MOFFORD
GOVERNOR
1601 WEST JEFFERSON
PHOENIX ARIZONA 85007
( 602) 542- 5536
SAMUEL A. LEWIS
DIRECTOR
March 15, 1989
The Honorable Rose Mofford
Governor of Arizona
1700 West Washington, Ninth Floor
S t a t e Capitol
Phoenix, Ari zona 85007
Dear Governor Mofford:
The fo1 lowing s i g n i f i c a n t i s s u e s , problems and progress developments have
occurred a t the Department of Corrections during the month of February 1989:
Prison Population1 Overcrowding
The t o t a l adult committed population i n February was 12,370. Three hundred
and s i x ( 306) " overcrowding" beds have been temporarily created t o acconodate
the continuing inflow of inmates. However, by June 1989 the Department will
not have the a b i l i t y t o house additional inmates a s t h e prisons will be a t
f ul 1 capacity .
Despite overcrowded conditions the i n s t i t u t i o n s remain calm, escapes are down,
and they appear t o be functioning normally.
Arizona S t a t e Prison - Yuma
The Yuma f a c i l i t y has a population of 230, only 20 short of the 250 inmate
capacity.
County Jai 1 Back1 og Cleared
The backlog of inmates housed in county j a i l s has been el iminated. The
Department was not paying f o r any inmates housed in county j a i l s a t t h e end of
the month.
Shock Incarceration Graduation
The graduation ceremony for the first group of shock incarceration inmates was
held on February 14, 1989 a t the South Unit of Arizona S t a t e Prison in
Florence. These four graduates arc now on intensive probation.
ROSE MOFFORD
GOVERNOR
i 1
16C1 WEST JEFFERSON
PnOENlX ARIZONA 85037
SAMUEL A. LEW! S
DIRECTOR
March 10, 1989
The Honorable Jim Skelley
Arizona House of Representatives
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Dear Representative Skelley:
Pursuant to your request at the last Joint Select Committee on Corrections, Sub-committee
on Long- Term Construction Needs, I have ' developed the enclosed in-formation
regarding the department's building plan through 1998.
We have displayed the inmate population projections and operating capacity
monthly through December 1990; thereafter, we have displayed the information on
an annual basis. The footnotes indicate our planned operating capacity increases
through December 1998. With the exception of the 1,200 beds denoted in footnotes
" e" and " f" all planned increzses have not been funded.
Additionally, there are two bar graphs that compare the projections and operating
capacities presented in the table. The first chart covers the inrerim period, January
1989 through December 1990, while the second chart displays populations 2nd
capacities through December 1998.
I hope this information proves beneficial to the committee. We stand ready to
amplify or clarify the information presented.
Sincere] y,
n A
~ uman~ sources~ evelopmeD~ ivlitsi on
. Enclosures ( 3)
cc: Samuel A. Lewis, Director
The Honorable Jim Meredith, Arizona House of Representatives
The Honorable Bobby Raymond, Arizona House of Representatives
The Honorable Peter Rios, Arizona State Senate
The Honorable Pat Wright, Arizona State Senate
r Keith Garza, Intern to Judiciary J
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS -
ADULT INSTITUTIONAL POPULATION PROJECTIONS*
SURPLUS/ DEFICIT IN OPERATING CAPACITY THROUGH 1998
1200 FUNDED BEDS AT FLORENCE/ WINSLOW PLUS PLANNED BUT UNFUNDED ADDITIONS
Month
12/ 88
Population
P r o j e c t i o n
Operating
Capacity
Surpl us/
Deficit*'
* Insi d e l o u t s i d e counts i n c l u d i n g county j a i l back1 og. P r o j e c t e d monthly
i n c r e z s e of 77.4 i n c l u d e s impact of a l t e r n a t i v e programs. Monthly i n c r e a s e
r e t u r n s t o 94.4 a f t e r December of 1990.
** The surpl u s l d e f i c i t column assumes l e g i s l a t i v e funding of a1 l f o o t n o t e d
i n c r e a s e s in operating c a p a c i t y .
ARIZONA DEPARTFlENT OF CORRECTIONS
FUNDED PLUS PLANNED BUT UNFUNDED ADDITIONS TO OPERATING CAPACITY
DATE
2/ 89
ADDITION
a. 40- bed addition due t o conversion of New Dawn t o a d u l t female
DWI f a c i l i t y .
b. 800- bed lease purchase/ rernodel ( Level 2). .. .
c. 288 beds a t Siftord ( Level 2) and Win< low ( Level 2 ) .
d. 800- bed quick build ( Level 2).
e. 400 beds a t Winslow ( Level 4 ) . Funded.
f . 800 beds a t Florence, Complex I I ( Level 4). Funded. .
800 beds a t Florence, Complex I1 ( Level 4).
g . 900 beds at F1 orence, Complex I1 ( Level 3).
h. 400 beds a t Yuma/ Florence ( Level 3).
i . 1,000 beds a t Florence, Complex I1 I ( Level 3).
j. 960 beds a t Florence, Complex 111 ( Level 5).
k. 1,000 beds a t Florence, Compl ex 111 ( Level 4 ) .
1. 200 beds of Yuma prototype ( Level 2). S i t e to be determined.
768 beds of SMU prototype at Florence ( Level 5).
100 DWI beds ( Pima County).
m. 600 beds of Cimarron prototype a t Florence ( Level 4 ) .
100 beds of Yuma prototype. S i t e t o be determined.
? nn
LUU Dh'i beds. S i ~ et o be determined.
100 CRC beds ( Maricopa County).
NUMBER OF INiVIATES/ BEDS a
A A A A A
N
x
- P Cr, m 0 tJ 4 cn ( 11
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 C
I I I , I 1 1 I I 7 m 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 n
Attachment I11
Joint Legislative Budget Committee
Overview of Corrections Fund
OVERVIEW
Y r- o4 z0 0C- D1
-- I1 w - i
, 3 0 Z D
0 - in g - ax I 2 . mm wm mx
V, O r z
o - i m- i
3 - 0
0 - 4 N
0 Z
o w n
3 0
W I 3
r- t 5 r z c o +
0 3 --- I
r+ a m
CORRECTIONS FUND
JLBC
PREPARED BY:
STAFF OF THE
JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE
CORRECTIONS FUND
. Established - July 1, 1984
Chapter 14, First Special Session, Laws of 1984, which is A. R. S. 41 - 1 605 . Consists of:
- Monies Collected From Luxury Taxes ( A. R. S. 41 - 1 204)
- Liquor ( 50G per gallon)
- Wine
Alcohol content greater than 24% ( 12.5$ per eight ounces)
Alcohol content 24% or less ( 42G per gallon)
- Beer ( 8G per gallon)
- Cigarettes and Tobacco ( 2$ on each 20 cigarettes)
- Cannabis and Controlled Substance
Monies Collected From the Tax on Vehicle Transfers
. ( Repealed by Chapter 21 1, Laws of 1986, Effective November 1, 1986) Uses
- Construction, Purchase, Renovation, or Conversion of Corrections Facilities
- Maintenance and Operation of Corrections Facilities, When Approved by the Legislature . Expiration Date - June 30, 1994
- Originally the fund was to expire on June 30, 1988, but that date was changed by Chapter 307, Set-tion
51, Laws of 1987.
JLBC Staff
311 I89
ÿ IONS E m
( Thcxsands of Dollars)
Revenue :
Luxury Taxes
Vehicle Transfer Tax
Other
Approved Exrxditure Authoritv
EY 1985 EY 1986 EY 1987 EY 1988 EY 1989 EY 1990
Actual Actual Actual Actual Estimated Estimated Total
Prism Oanstrudim $ 31,731.0 $ 43,634.0 $ 9,894.7 $ 150.0 $ 21,500.0 $ 18,513.0 $ 125,422.7
Juvenile Institutims Oanstructim 483.0 375.0 6,900.0 - 0- - 0- - 0- 7,758.0
Prison Maintenance and Brprwcmnts - 0- 2,907.3 1,405.0 2,500.0 235.0 - 0- 7,047.3
Prism EQuipnent and Start- up Wts - 0- 1,938.1 5,952.1 - 0- - 0- - 0- 7,890.2
Drug Enforcement - 0- - 0- - 0- 7,950.0 2,500.0 - 0- 10,450.0
Other - 0- - 0- 181.0 12.0 344.4 - 0- 537.4
JLBC Staff
3/ 1/ 89
CORRECTIONS
FUND
Construction
( FY 1985 - FY 1990)
ADULT
241 2 Bed Program - FY 1984
Tucson - 744 Beds
Florence - 768 Beds
Winslow - 650 Beds
Yuma - 250 Beds
Arizona State Prison Complex Douglas
192 Bed Addition - Special Management Unit - Florence
1200 Beds - FY 1988
Winslow - 400 Beds
Florence - 800 Beds
JUVENILE
Pinal Mountain Juvenile lnstitution - Globe ( 140 Beds)
Black Canyon Juvenile lnstitution - Phoenix ( 120 Beds)
TOTAL NEW CONSTRUCTION
Thousands of Dollars
$ 73,062.7
mm1m FUND
Projected Eimd Oandition
( Thousands of Dollars)
Fiscal Years 1989 - 1994
Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
EY 1989 FY 1990 FY 1991 FY 1992 FY 1993 E'Y 1994
w l m g ( pmected) $ 9,754.01/ $ 325.7 $ ( 88,202.2) $( 134,926.1) $( 147,462.0) $( 174,691.9)
Add Estimated Revenues 22,493.9 22,500.0 22,500.0 22,500.0 22,500.0 22,500.0
Total WsA vailable $ $ $ 22,~ 825.7 $ ( 65,702.2) $( 112,426.1) $( 124,962.0) $( 152,191.9)
Deduct & proved Expendike h t h r i t y
Prison Cbrstructicn
400 Beds W i n s l o w 8,830.0 4,610.0
800 Beds Florence 12,670.0 13,903.0
Drug Ehforcamnt 2,500.0
DepartmEnt of Mnhistration
Oanstructian Ahhistratian 2/ 344.4
Unliquidahle Prior Year
obligations 7,577.8
Apprwed Expenditure Authority $ $ $ 18, 513.0 - 0- - 0- - 0- - 0-
Departmmt of Oor& ians Request
Adult Etergency Beds 3/
Adult PriS~ n Oansthian - 0- $ 39,174.0 $ 29,400.0 $ 17,120.0 $ 40,384.0 $ 42,816.0
Juvenile Institutiandl Ocnstruction - 0- 4,500.0 7,300.0 1,000.0 - 0- - 0-
Facility Repair, Maintaance and
AdditiOm - 0- 48,500.0 5/ 32,183.0 16,575.0 9,005.0 9,394.0
Department of Mninistratian
Oanstructian Achhistratian 2/ 4/ 340.9 340.9 340.9 340.9 340.9
Sub- Total - 0- '; 92,514.9 $ 69,223.9 $ 35,035.9 $ 49,729.9 $ 52,550.9
Projected Ending Balance $ 325.7 $( 88,202.2) $( 134,926.1) $( 147,462,0) $( 174,691.9) $( 204,742.8)
1/ Actual
2/ For detail see Appendix to JLBC Annual. Budget, FY 1990 " NCM Appropriated mils and Special mds, which include
Appropriated Dollarsw, page 2.
3/ he ~ e p a motf Corrections is requesting $ 17,040,000 for prchase or construction of 1078 M s . As this is
currently being reviewed by the Joint wed amnittee on Corrections therefore no amount has been included.
4/ In current dollars.
5/ Does not include $ 5,272,000 recarmended for funding fran the General m d , see JLBC Staff Analysis and
Recarmendations, FY 1990, paqe CB- 4. - 5 -
U)
I$ l I-' PN
W
NA. 0.3 0 3 0 0 0
POI-' m o m 1 000 . .
I-' 1:
3
I-'
U
ID
N
3
I-'
ID
ID
A
JI[ I-'
0 - ! g Q & qj
2" @ B
Attachment IV
Lease- Purchase: Southern Correctional Service
and OPUS Corporation
In 1986 SCS, INC. conceived a solution to a problem most
states and local governments in America have today: How to build
new adult and juvenile correctional facilities that are efficient,
compact and cost effective, yet humane, while facing seriously
declining state, county and city revenues. This solution can also
be used for essential municipal infrastructure projects and for
school districts to renovate or build new school facilities.
The solution is for a governmental entity to use the " Turn-key"
lease- purchase method for obtaining these much needed projects.
The " Turn- key" lease- purchase method is the second generation of
lease- purchase. The word " Turn- key" is a descriptive adjective
describing the method by tuhich the lease- purcliase is provided:
( a) Establishing the need, type, and size of project,
( b) Design and engineering the project,
( c) Establishing the site for the project,
( d ) Establishing the cost of the project,
( el Obtaining the financing for the project through
the lease- purchase method,
( f) Preparation of legal Documentation required to
complete transaction,
( g) Construction of the project,
( h ) Turn over the project to the end user after final
acceptance.
On a " Turn- key" lease- purchase project a single proposal is
submitted to include all aspects of the project as mentioned above.
This allows the governmental entity to work with a single team
working together on the project from beginning to end instead
of breaking the project up into different parts which is sometimes
found to be curnbersorne, disjointed and very time consuming which
can make the project less effective as relating to the actual need
and more costly because of the lapse in time in coordinating the
different phases once they have been broken out separately. Under
this method no prior appropriation or capital dollars are required.
Many legislators in various states and local officials predict
that by using the second generation lease- purchase method, ie: the
" Turn- key" lease- purchase method, a project can be brought to fruition
in at least one- third the normal time. One well- known fact is that
" time is money". Another advantage to a " Turn- key" lease- purchase
project is: the design/ build feature takes into account the total
dollar figure which should be spent for the project instead of
designing the project and then finding out how much it costs.
SCS has found that cost overruns on a project can be sub-stantially
reduced by the SCS team being involved with the govern-mental
entity from the onset of the project and adjusting the
design and engineering until all criteria have been met prior to
financing.
A small percentage figure can be added to the financing price
( cost of project) to handle any last minute change orders that the
governmental entity desires. If those dollars are not used for
the project, those dollars revert back to the governmental entity
to further reduce the lease- payments. The debt service ( lease)
payments are limited to annual appropriations only, and is not
considered a legal general obligation or debt. A governmental
entity's budget monies can stretch further by " paying as you go"
without prior appropriations or up- front capital expenditures.
The lease can be paid off at any time wit11 a minor pre-payment
penalty.
SCS, INC., a Mississippi corporation, has formed a team of
substantial expertise and size to design, finance, and construct
a multitude of governmental infrastructure projects. The projects
range from, but are not limited to, City Iialls, Convention Centers,
Schools, Athletic Facilities, Adult and Juvenile Correctional
Facilities and Government Office Buildings.
The following is a list of the SCS primary members:
The president and CEO of SCS is Hubert B. ( Hub) Drone, Jr.,
B. S., M. S. W., Ph. D. In 1974, Dr. Drone planned, organized and
implemented Municipal Court Service, Inc., which provides proba-tion
services to the criminal justice system in Missouri, serving
over 2,000 clients a year. Municipal Court Service, Inc. is the
oldest private, for- profit probationary service in the nation.
The Vice- President of SCS is Vonda K. Drone. She has an ex-tensive
background in marketing and retail business management.
In 1976 Vonda Drone began researching how the private sector could
enter the public construction field. During this research process
she successfully lobbied legislation in the Missouri Capitol in
1987 and 1988. A resolution was passed supporting the company's
design and method of providing a " turn- key" lease- purchase correc-tional
facility. This financing method can be used for any munici-pal
construction project.
The General Counsel and a major principal in SCS is Jack E.
Koslow, who has been a practicing attorney since 1957. He received
his law degree from Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri.
During his three decades in the criminal justice system he served
seven years as an Assistant Prosecuting Attorney in St. Louis
County and twenty years as a Municipal Judge. While a Municipal
Judge, he was elected President of the Municipal Judges Association
in Missouri and served on that board for 16 years. We was one of
the authors of the rules that regulate the courts.
When Koslow helped form SCS, one of his first priorities was
to draft legislation to allow lease- purchase financing of prisons--
the method by which SCS can finance any municipal construction
project. This legislation was rigorously lobbied, and it passed
in the same year it was introduced. Not all states need this type
of legislation, and Koslow has since been a part of a team effort
to market the concept in other states.
Hub Drone, Vonda Drone and Jack Koslow, the three principals
of SCS, diligently researched and recruited the team of experts to
fill out the well- rounded organization it would take to design,
construct and finance such projects on a " turn- key" lease- purchase
arrangement.
The SCS primary team:
Alberici Construction Company, the general contractor on the SCS
team, completed $ 464,000,000 worth of projects last year. Alberici,
a highly respected firm, has built a wide variety of large- scale
commercial and governmental projects throughout the Midwest.
Sachs Electric is the electrical contractor on the SCS team. 111
1987 Sachs Electric, a subsidiary of the Sachs Holding Corn any,
secured $ 75,000,000 worth of projects; it is ranked among the top
15 electrical contractors in the nation.
Murphy Company Mechanical Contractors brings extensive design/ build
plumbing engineering to SCS projects. The list of projects for
Murpliy Company Mechanical Contractors includes a large variety
of government jobs at the local, state and federal level. In
1987 Murphy Company Mechanical Contractors reached its perform-ance
goal of $ 80,000,000 worth of new contracts.
SCS, as the developer, has architect Lawrence Goldberq as the
team's primary design architect, working in conjunction wit11
local architects on each specific project. Goldberg has exten-sive
experience in institutional designs including hospitals,
juvenile facilities and renovation of existing prison sites.
Burgdahl & Graves, AIA Architects, formed in 1982, is a full-service
architectural, design and interiors firm based in
Louisiana. The firm has worked on federal, state, and local
projects ranging in size from $ 15,000 to $ 15,000,000. Burgdahl
& Graves' expertise includes land planning, building design,
interior design and space planning.
Prudential- bache Capital Funding is the primary lender for the
SCS team. SCS has available more than $ 500,000,000 a year from
Prudential- Bache to fund lease- purchase " turn- key" facilities to
federal, state or local governments. Mike Hark, Vice- President
of Prudential- Bache Capital Funding in Denver, Colorado, is the
SCS's teams financial coordinator for these projects.
For the last 24 months the SCS " turn- key" lease- purchase
method has been finely honed and crafted with the financial and
legal assistance of Prudential Bache Capital Funding. In October
of 1988 this method was brought to the " market place" for the first
time in St. James Parish, Louisiana for an 80- bed Youth Service
Facility. Since securing a resolution from St. James Parish to
design, engineer, finance and construct the 80- bed Youth Service
Facility on a " turn- key" lease- purcilase arrangement, three
additional proposals are presently being negotiated. One is
for a thirty- million dollar renovation and repair program and
installing WAC systems at appropriate schools in the Orleans
Parish School District; the second project is being negotiated
in Jefferson Parish for a Municipal Parking Garage; and the third,
but not least, is final negotiation with the State of Louisiana
for a 500- bed Adult Correctional Facility to be located in East
Carroll Parish.
Opus Corporation Fact Sheet
Definition of " Opus"
Opits Corporation
" A crcativc work"
A privately hcld dcsignhuild and devclopmcnt company that providcs
single- source and vertically intcgratcd designbuild and rcal cslatc dcvclop-mcnt
services to commercial, industrial and institutional customers in the
northwest region of the United States. Opus provides creative solutions to
meet business space needs- using the talents of its architects, engineers,
construction and real estate specialists, and other employees.
OPUS
SOUTHWEST
Opus Corporation Territory
Locations
Office Headquarters
Field Headquarters
Affiliates
Opus Sponsored
Nonprofit Corporation
Workforce
Opus Center
9900 East Bren Road
Minnetonka, MN 55343
Eagan, MN
Opus U. S. Corporation:
Opus North Corporation - Chicago, IL and Milwaukee, WI
Opus Southwest Corporation - Phoenix, AZ
Opus South Corporation - Tampa and Pensacola, FL
Normandale Properties, Inc. - Minnetonka, MN
Opus Properties, Inc. - Minnetonka, MN
North Star Ventures - Minneapolis, MN
Adler Management Corporation - Minneapolis, MN
Fabcon, Inc. - Savage, MN
Progress Valley - Minneapolis, MN and Phoenix, AZ
( Chemical dependency treatment programs)
Office
Ficld Opcrations
Affiliated Companies
( excluding Fabcon and Progress Valley)
Approximate 1:' mployee
Populations
Total Employccs
History
Achievemen fs
The company was founded in 1953 by Gerald Raucnhorst Thc namc was
changcd from thc Raucnhorst Corporation to Opus Corporation in July, 1982.
Thc company began as a gcncral contracting firm, movcd on to dcvclopmcnt
projccts, thcn focuscd on dcsignbuild, and, beginning in 1972, bcgan cx-panding
to othcr U. S. citics. In April, 1988, the company was rcorganizcd
into two operations-- Opus Corporation and Opus U. S. Corporation. Both
companies operate independently of each other whilc coopcrating for thcir
mutual benefit.
Opus and affiliates have constructed nearly 1,000 buildings in 23 different
states. Combined ( Opus Corporation and Opus U. S.) annual construction
volume is in excess of $ 200 million.
Opus Corporation ranked 150th of the top 400 construction firms nationwide
in 1988 according to the Engineering News- Record magazine.
Normandale Properties, Inc. manages more than 9 million square feet in
approximately 90 properties in nine states.
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer Gerald Rauenhorst
President and Chief Operating Officer Gene Haugland
Correctional Facilities
Project
Bullock County Correctional
I b Institution * Santa Rosa County Jail
OPUS SOUTHWEST
Tomoka Correctional Institution
Eecambia County Jail - Phase I
Juvenile Justice Center
Location Cost
Union Springs, Sll, 500,000
Alabama
Miltion, Florida $ 4,000,000
Volusia County, Florida $ 3,600,000
Pensacola, Florida $ 9,000,000
Pensacola, Florida $ 3,000,000
Description
611 Inmate
Minimum Security Dormitory
Style Facility
126 Inmate
Multi- Security Facility
1,245 Inmate
Maximum Security
Attachment V
Proposed Language to Amend Procurement Code
T h i r t y - n i n t h L e g i s l a t u r e
F i r s t Regular Session
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO*,. B. - i , .
( Reference t o b i l l )
1 Page -, a f t e r l i n e -, i n s e r t :
2 " Sec. -. T i t l e 41, chapter 23, a r t i c l e 5, Arizona Revised
3 Statutes, i s amended by adding s e c t i o n 41- 2579, t o read:
4 41- 2579. C o n s t r u c t i o n bids; f i n a n c i n q and other
5 services
6 NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW, AN INVITATION FOR
7 BIDS FOR A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT MAY INCLUDE A REQUIREMENT THAT T- H E
8 BIDDER PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION, FINANCING AND OTHER SERVICES FOR A
9 PROJECT IF THE DIRECTOR DETERMINES THAT SUCH A CONTRACT I S
10 ADVANTAGEOUS TO THIS STATE."
11 Amend t i t l e t o conform
04/ 13/ 89
4: 30 PM
SL
OOOOHLC
Attachment VI
Arizona State Land Department memo:
State Land for Prison Sites
ROSE MOFFOHD
GOVERNOR
FROM :
1616 WEST ADAMS
PHOENIX. ARIZONA 85007
M J IiASSELL
STAT€ LAND COMMISSIONER
MEMORANDUM
Cindy Kappler
Research Analyst
House of Representatives
Glendon E. Collins
Deputy Land Commissioner
State Land Department
April 6, 1989
SUBJECT: State Lands for Prison Sites
This is in response to your telephone request for maps and information
about State lands that are available for prison sites for use in
connection with your work with the Subcommittee of the Joint Legislative
Corrections Committee on Long Term Prison Construction Needs.
" State landsu are actually State Trust lands; lands that were granted to
the State by the Federal Enabling Act to be leased or sold to raise
revenues to support public schools, universities, prisons, and other
public institutions. Trust lands, therefore, are not State- owned lands
that can be used free of charge by the State for construction of prisons
or other public facilities.
At the request of a State agency, the Governor can sign an
institutional taking which reserves a particular parcel of Trust land
for use by that agency. However, the Arizona Constitution, the State
Enabling Act, and a series of State statutes and court decisions require
the Land Department to lease and sell Trust lands for fair market
rentals and purchase prices, even to other State agencies, and to
transfer the monies received to the State Treasurer to help meet the
budgets which the Legislature authorizes for the Trust beneficiaries.
Therefore, even though State agencies have a mechanism by which they can
be assured of the right to use Trust lands, they have to pay fair market
rent for that use. The only exception to this rental requirement is
where the State agency is both the beneficiary and the user of a parcel
of Trust lands. For example, when the Department of Corrections ( DOC)
builds a prison on Penitentiary Trust land, the DOC must get a lease on
the land from the Land Department. An annual rental is assigned to the
lease, but this is offset by a corresponding beneficiary credit and no
rent money actually needs to be paid to the Penitentiary Trust Fund.
The Penitentiary Trust foregoes the option of generating income by
having the land leased to some other party, but at least the DOC can use
the land for a prison site rent free.
Cindy Kappler
Page 2
Attached is a list of the 14 Trust beneficiaries from our 1988 Annual
Report and the acreages of Trust lands for each beneficiary. Attached
also is a land status map which shows in blue the State Trust lands.
While recent land exchanges have altered land ownerships in some rural
areas, the Trust land ownership near urban areas as shown on this map is
still reasonably accurate, and the map will give you a good visual
illustration of the size and location of Trust land holdings. Our
Resource Analysis Division is preparing updated Trust land status maps
for each county, and we will send you a set of these maps when they are
completed. You will note from the acreage listing that 81,354 acres or
less than 1% of the 9.6 million acres of State Trust lands are in the
Penitentiary Grant.
Each of the Trust land parcels is assigned to a specific Trust. Most of
the penitentiary grant lands are in rather remote and rural areas that
lack water, utilities, and public access and are poorly suited for
prison sites.
We do have the option, however, under certain circumstances to make
I1beneficiary exchanges1I, which can switch the Trust beneficiary that was
assigned to a specific land parcel to another Trust land parcel in
another area. In effect we can move penitentiary or university
beneficiary status onto Trust lands that are suitable for specific DOC
or University purposes, and thus obtain rent- free status for the State
facility. These beneficiary exchanges must be approved by the State
Selection Board, consisting of the Governor, the State Attorney General,
and the State Treasurer.
Recent beneficiary exchanges have accomplished the rent- free objective
for the Adobe Mountain, Perryville, and Globe prison facilities and for
the ASU Westside Campus.
The Land Department is currently working with the Governor's Prison City
Task Force and the DOC in planning for expansion of prison and support
facilities in the Florence area, and in making beneficiary exchanges as
appropriate to convert any Trust lands that are needed for prison sites
in this area to a rent- free penitentiary grant status for the DOC.
In summary, there are strict legal requirements governing the lease and
sale of State Trust lands. However, there are Trust lands near most
Arizona cities and towns, and the Land Department is ready and willing
to assist the State in any way we can in facilitating the expansion of
the prison system.
GEC : ds
Attachment
c: M. J. Hassell, Land Commissioner
Art Othon, Office of the Governor
Cathy Eden, Director, Dept. of Administration
STATE TRUST LAND ACREAGE BY BENEFICIARY
BENEFICIARIES
Legisiative, Executive, and Judicial Buildings
State Hospital
Miners Hospital
Miners Hospital 1929
State Charitable and Penal Institutions
Penitentiaries
Normal Schools
Agriculture and Mechanical Colleges
~ il'itar~ I nstitutes
School of Mines
University Land Code
University of Arizona ( Act of 2- 18- 1881)
School for the Deaf and Blind
Common Schools*
TOTAL 14 BENEFICIARIES
* INCLUDES COUNTY BONDS
1
TRUST
FY 1978
66,660
79,198
48,648
53,311
80,010
80,830
172,405
134,469
82,945
132,882
166,354
62,216
84,209
8,342,469
9,586,606
ACRES
FY 1988
66,940
78,331
48,776
47,905
78,738
81,354
171,951
135,389
82,945
133,126
166,249
59,847
84,135
8,362,208
9,597,894