HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE February 3, 1998 1:40 P.M. TAPE HFC 98 - 14, Side 1. TAPE HFC 98 - 14, Side 2. TAPE HFC 98 - 15, Side 1. TAPE HFC 98 - 15, Side 2. TAPE HFC 98 - 16, Side 1. CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee meeting to order at 1:40 P.M. PRESENT Co-Chair Hanley Representative Kelly Co-Chair Therriault Representative Kohring Representative J. Davies Representative Grussendorf Representative G. Davis Representative Moses Representative Foster Representative Mulder Representative Martin was not present for the meeting. ALSO PRESENT Jeff Logan, Staff, Representative Joe Green; James Baldwin, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, Department of Law; Bill Parker, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Corrections; Jim Carlstrom, President, Delta/Greely Community Coalition, Delta Junction; Glen E. Wright, Mayor, City of Delta Junction; Frank Pruitt, President, ALLVEST Corporation, Anchorage; Robert LeResche, Private Financing Counsel, ALLVEST Corporation, Juneau; Thomas Livingston, Architect, Livingston & Sloan, Anchorage; Ed Schitler, BJSS Architects, Corrections Architect, Olympia, Washington; Janet Michaelson, Security Consultant, ALLVEST Corporation, Anchorage; Leslie Kirk, Delta Junction; Gary Damron, Public Safety Employee Association (PSEA), Eagle River. (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE) Fairbanks Hugh Doogan; Frank Gold Delta Junction Art Griswold; Michael McCowan; Donna Garden; Devin Kelly; David Wright; Bill Johnson; Shellie Matthew's; Patrick Schlichting; Patrick Dalton; Robert Bradley; Daniel Lucas; Dan Beck; Dave Anderson; Loretta Schooley; San Dighton. SUMMARY HB 53 An Act relating to the authority of the Department of Corrections to contract for facilities for the confinement and care of prisoners, and annulling a regulation of the Department of Corrections that limits the purposes for which an agreement with a private agency may be entered into; authorizing an agreement by which the Department of Corrections may, for the benefit of the state, enter into one lease of, or similar agreement to use, space within a correctional facility that is operated by a private contractor, and setting conditions on the operation of the correctional facility affected by the lease or use agreement; and giving notice of and approving a lease-purchase agreement or similar use-purchase agreement for the design, construction, and operation of a correctional facility, and setting conditions and limitations on the facility's design, construction, and operation. HB 53 was HELD in Committee for further discussion. HJR 36 Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to redistricting of the legislature, and repealing as obsolete language in the article setting out the apportionment schedule used to elect the members of the first state legislature. HJR 36 was HELD in Committee for further discussion. HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 36 Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to redistricting of the legislature, and repealing as obsolete language in the article setting out the apportionment schedule used to elect the members of the first state legislature. JEFF LOGAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN, explained that HJR 36 proposes to amend Article 6 and Article 14 of the Alaska Constitution. Article 6 addresses legislative reapportionment. Mr. Logan proposed changes to reflect rulings by the U.S. and Alaska Supreme Courts, and to enshrine single member legislative districts in the constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court rulings, Baker v. Carr, 396 U.S. 267, issued in 1962, and Renolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 567, issued in 1964, established the so-called "one person, one vote" apportionment rule. The result of these decisions is that all state legislative bodies in the United States are apportioned on the basis of population. The Alaska Constitution, as originally written, bases senate districts partly on population, and partly on geography. The Alaska Supreme Court rulings, Wade v. Nolan, Alaska 414 P.2nd 689, in 1966, Egan v. Hammond, Alaska, 502 p.2nd 856, in 1972, and Groh v. Egan, Alaska 526 P.2d 863, 1974 establishes an equal basis for both civilian and military population. He continued, Section 4 of HJR 36 would establish single member legislative (House) districts. The change essentially "constitutionalizes" the status quo. Single member districts have proven to work well here in Alaska, and in a number of other states. Along with Alaska, several other states have shifted from multi, to single member districts. Finally, Section 9 of HJR 36 repeals Article 14 of the Alaska Constitution. Article 14 sets out the original reapportionment schedule, which is now obsolete. Co-Chair Therriault explained that through a court case, a determination was made that the census does account for establishing the redistricting base population. A resident population is based on the census count and redistricting is based on the population resident count. Co-Chair Therriault asked clarification of language used on Page 1, Line 8, "Within each election". Mr. Logan noted that language was drafted to delineate between House and Senate districts. Co-Chair Hanley pointed out that language was clarified in Section 4. Representative J. Davies asked if the census would count people staying in hotel rooms. He pointed out such action could drastically affect places with a lot of tourism traffic. Representative Grussendorf indicated his concern regarding the proliferation of constitutional amendments coming before the Committee. He stated that the proposed legislation was not needed. Representative Mulder disagreed, pointing to problems with double member districts. He suggested that the legislation would clarify the Alaska State Constitution and would eliminate ambiguity. Representative J. Davies pointed out that the State, to date, does not have multi member's districts and that there has been no problem. He echoed concern with need for the legislation. Co-Chair Therriault stated that if members agree with the single member concept, the proposed legislation would guarantee it be available from this point forward. Mr. Logan pointed out that in 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court did specify the single member preference. In that federal judiciary, if a reapportionment plan were written, there would be preference for single member districts. There is a state movement toward this practice. The sponsor's intent is to keep a reapportionment plan out of court. Representative Grussendorf advised that every plan, regardless, would need to come before the U.S. Department of Justice. Co-Chair Therriault questioned Section 9 and the Articles proposed for deletion. Mr. Logan responded that Section 7 is obsolete resulting from a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. Section 5 addresses deviation between districts. In 1987, the Supreme Court ruled that deviation up to 14.8% would be permissible. The drafter recommended that this section be deleted. Article 14 refers to the first reapportionment, which is currently obsolete. Representative John Davies noted concern with deleting the proposed sections. He felt that those provisions had been included to address unusual and rapid changes in population. He recommended amending the provisions rather than deleting them. Co-Chair Therriault believed that when a census is taken every ten years that would be frequent enough to address rapid growth concerns. JAMES BALDWIN, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CIVIL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, commented on the proposed changes contained in the resolution. He advised that HJR 36 would make substantial shifts from the way that things have been done in the past, which will affect various regions within the State. He understood that the intent proposed in the House Judiciary Committee reference to Page 2, Line 7, was to establish a provision that would prevent military voter surveys, and would then determine what portion of those were not residents and not participating in the electoral process. There would exist a system to address the non participating military voters and their dependants. He believed that the legislation had become confused with that which was put forth by Representative Green's staff and the intent achieved in the previous committee hearing. In the last reapportionment case, the Court stipulated that the board had justified not using military surveys as a part of the 1990 reapportionment, but that they had an obligation to go through the exercise of establishing that. The intent of the previous committee was to remove that obligation. Mr. Baldwin proposed that in today's realignment situation, there could exist an imbalance in certain districts based on the number of non-resident military voters that are counted in the population base in the census. The Legislature needs to take great care in documenting intention when making these changes with the understanding of legal consequences. He contended that, military voter's register to vote because they want the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD). Mr. Baldwin added, in the House Judiciary Committee, there was language added to make the Senate district lines contiguous. Concern exists with this measure because some districts are not contiguous lines but rather there are bodies of water between them. The Courts have recommended that the standards of contiguousness are not so rigorous that they must apply to Senate districts, an act, which would create geographic problems within the State. This application can create serious districting problems in the future and could mean a loss of a Senate seat for State rural areas. That situation would create retrogression. Mr. Baldwin stressed that the Finance Committee must establish a strong defense record so when put to the test, it will be workable to the Justice Department. A feasible record has not yet been established. Representative Grussendorf pointed out that the committee substitute version creates twenty (20) Senate districts and then divides them into two (2) House districts. He believed such action would create problems, and recommended starting with House districts creating an economic compactness, he felt would work more smoothly. Co-Chair Hanley stated that the way the current constitution reads indicates that "reapportionment shall be based upon civilian population with any election district as reported by the census". If the previous committee intended to remove "civilian", we would be left with the current constitutional language. Mr. Baldwin understood that the intent of the House Judiciary Committee was to remove the ability to perform the non-military surveys. He suggested that the intent be clarified and the correct meaning established. Co-Chair Hanley felt that including the word "resident" would open up a constitutional bag of worms. A survey administered only on military bases and not including those people who are not residents, and then trying to apply the same types of restrictions to the rest of the population becomes problematic. A census is what has been used in the past. Mr. Baldwin advised that concern had been addressed in a Supreme Court case, at which time it was decided that the State had a compelling interest to focus on the military population. Other populations tend to be more migratory, not staying as long as the military. Co-Chair Hanley reiterated that adding the word "resident" creates a host of problems and that he would support deleting that word. Mr. Baldwin stated that it was not the intention to exclude the non-resident military voters. He commented that if that was no longer possible, the Department then would not have the concern. Co-Chair Therriault asked for further information regarding the version submitted to the Finance Committee and that it reflect action taken in the House Judiciary Committee. HJR 36 was HELD in Committee for further consideration. (Tape Change HFC 98- 14, Side 2). HOUSE BILL NO. 53 "An Act relating to the authority of the Department of Corrections to contract for facilities for the confinement and care of prisoners, and annulling a regulation of the Department of Corrections that limits the purposes for which an agreement with a private agency may be entered into; authorizing an agreement by which the Department of Corrections may, for the benefit of the state, enter into one lease of, or similar use, space within a correctional facility that is operated by a private contractor, and setting conditions on the operation of the correctional facility affected by the lease or use agreement; and giving notice of and approving a lease-purchase agreement or similar use-purchase agreement for the design, construction, and operation of a correctional facility, and setting conditions and limitations on the facility's design, construction, and operation." Representative Mulder introduced the bill, noting that prisons in Alaska are all overcrowded. He acknowledged that he had been approached by the Mayor of Delta Junction in hopes of turning Fort Greely into a private prison facility. The City is under pressure to create a plan for that facility by March 15th. Representative J. Davies questioned why a bill would be required to accomplish this intent. Representative Mulder responded that the statutes don't clearly stipulate whether or not the legislation would be needed. Hence, should the Department of Corrections undertake such a contract, he believed the State would be taken to Court. Representative J. Davies read from the current statute AS 33.30.031: "If the Commissioner determines that suitable state correction facilities are not available, the Commissioner may enter into an agreement with a public or private agency to provide necessary services." He stressed that current language is broad and straightforward, which could address the recommended need. Co-Chair Therriault advised that the language currently before the Committee was permissive and that there would be discussion on whether "may" should be replaced by "shall". Additional language could be used to instruct the Administration in a particular direction. GLEN E. WRIGHT, MAYOR, CITY OF DELTA JUNCTION, stated that in 1994, the downsizing of Ft. Greely, created a stressful economic situation in that area. At that time, the community formed Delta/Greely Community Coalition. With the Governor's help, the Coalition became the entity responsible for implementing a plan for Ft. Greely. JIM CARLSTROM, PRESIDENT, DELTA/GREELY COMMUNITY COALITION, DELTA JUNCTION, stated that the coalition consisted of twelve members from the community. The work of the coalition was to determine a replacement alternative for Ft. Greely. Until a proposal was received from ALLVEST, there was no viable option to fill the bill. Mr. Carlstrom commented that the City Council, the school district and most organizations in the community supported the proposal. The plan was presented before the community in two different scheduled events to educate them. When the vote occurred, 62% voted for the measure, recommending ALLVEST continue forward. He stressed that by March 15th, the reuse plan must be submitted. Representative J. Davies asked if the City of Delta Junction has the authority to operate such a facility. Mayor Wright replied that the City will be a "go-between" the Department of Corrections and ALLVEST Corporation. He understood that the city of Delta Junction would have a contract with ALLVEST and with the State Of Alaska. Representative J. Davies asked if the city had police powers. Mayor Wright said that there was no need. Representative J. Davies understood that those powers would be required by ordinance because Ft. Greely is located five miles from the city limits. Co-Chair Therriault questioned the community's basic understanding of the issues proposed. Mr. Carlstrom stated that open meetings for the community had taken place on December 16th, January 8th and January 15th. An election was held on January 17th. The initial letter of intent was received from ALLVEST in December. He felt that as a coalition, the information had been dispersed efficiently and the community was well informed. LT. COL. DAVE ANDERSON (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), U.S. ARMY, MATSU, noted that in the redesigning of the military base, economic resources can be made available to facilitate recovery. This option has been provided to the Delta/Greely Community Coalition. The Army is committed to support the community in whatever reuse they determine beneficial for that area. There will be an impact based on the current proposal, as realignment would begin one year early. He suggested such action would impact the civilian employees. Representative Mulder asked if the federal employees supported the plan. Lt. Col. Anderson replied that the Federal Employees Union at Ft. Greely has endorsed a plan to undertake realignment in the year 2000. There are concerns that it is now scheduled one year early. Representative Mulder asked if $48 million dollars to clean up the facility would be sufficient. Lt. Col. Anderson replied that currently, the program would cost $48 million dollars for demolition of those facilities that the Army will not retain. There are 1.7 million square feet of facilities; the Army will retain about 250 thousand square feet of those facilities. In the current proposal, almost 900 thousand square feet will be reused. K. LESLIE KIRK, CONCERNED CITIZEN OF DELTA JUNCTION, spoke against the proposed legislation. He stressed that a misunderstanding currently exists. The Coalition consists of a selective group of people who were chosen because of their support of the proposal. Mayor Wright represents only 20% of the people in the Delta Junction area. Mr. Kirk advised that correspondence had been made with three universities to consider the use of Ft Greely. He continued the "public" meetings referenced by the previous speaker were not public participation meetings but instead presentations by ALLVEST. He noted that questions were asked how the plan would be able to use the people of Delta Junction. ALLVEST was not able to give any guarantees for those concerns. Mr. Kirk continued, the vote taken was not legal. In order to have a legal vote, it must be noticed at least a twenty (20) days prior the vote. He reiterated that the vote was not legal. People were allowed to register to vote when they showed up to vote. According to Alaska law, there must be a thirty-day waiting period after a person has registered before they are allowed to vote. The vote allowed absentee and fax balloting which was done incorrectly. Mr. Kirk advised that if the ALLVEST proposal is not accepted and there is not another proposition available immediately, Ft. Greely will not be demolished right away. The facilities would then be placed into the private sector to bid for fair market value. He believed that the complex would be sold. (Tape Change HFC 98- 15, Side 1). Mr. Kirk reiterated that the City of Delta Junction is in an uproar regarding this legislation. ALLVEST provided the Coalition a contract to be signed without reading the document. In that document, all building contents will be given to ALLVEST; all the private property would be leased to ALLVEST for $10 dollars a year and after 5 years they would then own the equipment. Mr. Kirk again stressed that the people of Delta Junction want to have a legal vote within the required time frame. Mr. Kirk concluded reiterating that there are three universities contemplating use of the facilities. He noted that the post was perfectly geared for use as a college. There has been a proposition that it be used as a special junior college for Native Alaskans as a step between the village and university. FRANK PRUITT, PRESIDENT, ALLVEST CORPORATION, ANCHORAGE, noted that ALLVEST made the initial proposal to the local reuse authority. He advised that the proposal would return dollars to Alaska since the State currently sends prisoners out to Arizona. He emphasized that the facility would be a very good correctional facility. Alaska is unique in that we house both our misdemeanants and long-term felons in the same facility. There has not been a comprehensive plan putting Alaska in that spot. This has evolved, as we are a small state with remote criminal justice infrastructures. The issue is polarized between having a centralized system and regional expansion. Ft. Greely would provide 800 long-term medium security beds for incarceration of Alaskan offenders. Space is needed in the regional jails to accommodate this population. He added that he was not aware of any other state, which transferred prisoners out. Currently, the Department of Corrections is operating over emergency capacity with nearly 600 more prisoners than they have legal beds. When ALLVEST met at Ft. Greely, they understood that the base was scheduled for realignment and was going through a public process to find a developer to provide the reutilization. ALLVEST approached the Coalition after most of their other ideas became unfeasible. ALLVEST encouraged the Coalition to educate the public in placing a correctional facility in that area. He added that ALLVEST is comfortable that Ft. Greely could be turned into a secure facility. Employees can be hired and the facility can be built and operated at a competitive price. He recommended that the Legislature should establish a "not to exceed figure" with the legislation. ALLVEST proposes to augment the State of Alaska correctional services through a private-public venture that will provide high quality correctional services at a competitive price. Representative J. Davies reiterated his concern regarding the need of the proposed statute. Mr. Pruitt replied that Bob LeResche would be better able to answer that query. Title 33 was revised during the Hickel Administration to enable private prisoner contracting out to Arizona. Mr. Pruitt believes that the Department of Corrections has the authority and responsibility to private contract care of inmates. TOM LIVINGSTON, ARCITECT, LIVINGSTON & SLOAN, ANCHORAGE, stated that the proposal being offered is essentially an 18-acre site in the middle of Ft. Greely. Over a dozen of the current facilities would be renovated. The concrete frame construction would receive a 40% renovation. There exists over 320 units of housing to be utilized by staff at the facility. Capital costs associated with the process are estimated to be $32 million dollars, amortized per bed cost per day. ALLVEST has invested over 1000 hours of design time to date. He concluded that the conversion of Ft. Greely to a prison would be safe and also secure, making economic sense. ED SCHILTER, BJSS ARCITECTS, CORRECTIONAL FACILITY ARCITECT, OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON, stated that his firm has been in the practice of architecture for correction facilities for over twenty-five years. The proposed facility is similar to one in Washington State, which his firm has been upgrading for the last ten years. Initially, the process creates a program to determine the needs of everyone housed and working at the facility. He emphasized that the Ft. Greely facility would adhere well to the proposed use. JANET MICHAELSON, RETIRED PRISON SUPERINTENDENT, WASHINGTON STATE, SECURITY CONSULTANT, ALLVEST, echoed that the proposed plan is very viable. It has all the elements in place, both program and design. She thought that Ft. Greely could be a first rate correctional operation, as the layout lends itself well to the conversion. Representative Mulder asked if revenue bonds would be needed to make the transition. BOB LE RESCHE, PRIVATE FINANCING COUNSEL, ALLVEST, JUNEAU, stated that there would be no cost to the State. ALLVEST would finance the $30 million dollar cost of the renovation with private financing. In order to do the financing at a reasonable cost, it will be necessary to get the Legislative permission. Representative J. Davies asked if a resolution from the Legislature would suffice. Mr. LeResche replied that a resolution would be worth "little more than no action". Bond market requires that the statute specify "shall" rather than "may". Co-Chair Therriault reminded members that the State of Alaska will not own the site. Mr. LeResche agreed and noted that everyone will take the risk; the bondholders will assume security interest, although, and the greater security interest will be held by a corporate guarantee. The State will not be responsible for paying the rate if it does not work. Representative J. Davies commented that the twenty-year lease would be subject to an annual appropriation. Mr. LeResche agreed. Representative G. Davis asked if the property title of Ft. Greely would be transferred to the City of Delta Junction. Mr. LeResche stated that the transfer of the property, under the Federal Property Redevelopment Act, the federal government would transfer the property to the local redevelopment authority to help leverage economic development in that area. The City of Delta Junction would be involved as the entity that contracts with the State to provide both the facility and the operation. Then the City will contract ALLVEST to create the facility and execute the operations. TELECONFERENCE TESTIMONY WAS TAKEN: ART GRISWOLD (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION, testified in support of HB 53. He thought that citizens of Delta Junction had been given plenty of time to vote and that they had been well educated surrounding the issue. He urged Committee members to move the bill from Committee. (Tape Change HFC 98- 15, Side 2). MICHAEL MCCOWAN, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), MIDDLE SCHOOL TEACHER, DELTA JUNCTION, voiced support for the proposed legislation. He spoke against the "prison town" syndrome and added that the ballot voting time frame had been adequate. Mr. McCowan urged Committee members to support HB 53. DONNA GARDINO, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), UNIVERSITY FACULTY MEMBER, DELTA JUNCTION, encouraged the Legislature to require the bid for the use of Ft. Greely to be placed into a competitive bidding process to identify the best value provider for professional services. She voiced concerned that ALLVEST has never operated a medium security prison. A competitive process would yield better value to the State and the community. Unless there are successful negotiations with ALLVEST including the proper legal and management approval, there will not be a contract. KEVIN KELLY (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION, voiced support for the proposed legislation. He noted the penalties that the State pays housing prisoners out of Alaska due to overcrowding. Privatization of the new prison would be most beneficial and economical for the State. He addressed the loss of jobs happening in Delta Junction due to the downsizing at Ft. Greely. Mr. Kelly urged Committee members to support passage of HB 53. DAVID WRIGHT, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION, acknowledged that drastic misinformation disbursed about the ALLVEST proposal. He pointed out that a new facility would not be able to compete with the cost of housing prisoners out of the State in Arizona. He agreed that a vote had been taken after two rushed meetings at which the majority of the community were not present. Many of the people who voted did so without being fully educated regarding the issue. ALLVEST has a questionable intent. BILL JOHNSON (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION, spoke against the proposed legislation. He spoke to the moral, legal and ethical questions regarding privatizing prisons. He foresaw the current proposal not saving the taxpayer any money. Mr. Johnson reiterated his concern with the way that the process had been handled to determine the best use of the Ft. Greely facility. HUGH DOOGAN (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), FAIRBANKS, spoke against the proposed legislation. He provided a brief history of the Ft. Greely site noting that a nuclear power plant had been built there and that it had been closed in 1972. He understood that there is nuclear waste buried at Ft. Greely and capped with cement. Buying this piece of land would be a huge liability for the State of Alaska and the people of Delta Junction. He suggested that putting a prison at Ft. Greely will take the U.S. Army "off the hook". SHELLIE MATHEEWS (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION. voiced concern with the rapidity with which the proposal was pushed on the people of Delta Junction. She urged the Committee to reconsider passage of the proposed legislation. PATRICK SCHLICHTING, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE, FT. GREELY, DELTA JUNCTION, spoke against the proposed legislation, noting that the civilian employees at Ft. Greely are not in support of any proposal which expedites the Brag time line. Mr. Schlichting also challenged the proposed $48 million dollar cost associated with demolition. He requested a cost break down of that figure. Mr. Schlichting urged Committee members to proceed with caution. PATRICK DALTON, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION, questioned if ALLVEST would transport prisoners from other states to the new Alaska prison. Co-Chair Therriault advised that concern would be addressed in the contract. Mr. Dalton spoke against the voting procedure, which occurred in Delta Junction concerning the use of Ft. Greely. He questioned if private prisons would be good for the State Of Alaska. Mr. Dalton warned that wherever there is profit, there is a potential for corruption. The responsibility for criminal justice rests in the hands of government, not the private sector. ROBERT BRADLEY (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION, stated that he initially voted yes for privatization of the prison, although, now he agreed that a revote should be taken in the community when they have been adequately informed regarding the long-range plan. DANIEL LUCAS (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION, commented that the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections has the responsibility to get the competitive bidding process undertaken. He questioned why ALLVEST was requesting a 20-year lease rather than a trial lease period. He added that Delta Junction lacks the infrastructure needed to sign a contract with any major company. He recommended that the Commissioner of DOC take control of the situation. DAN BECK, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), SUPERINTENDANT - DELTA SCHOOL DISTRICT, DELTA JUNCTION, voiced concern with the quality of programs offered in the current school system given the down-sizing at Ft. Greely. All possibilities being considered except that for the prison will not keep the schools at their present status. He urged the Committee to pass the proposed legislation. Co-Chair Therriault asked if the teacher's union had taken a stance on the proposal. Mr. Beck was not aware of action taken. LORETTA SCHOOLEY, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA NEWSPAPER EDITOR, DELTA JUNCTION, spoke in support of the proposed legislation. She commented that membership of the Coalition adequately represented the Delta Junction community and that the vote represented a fair and widespread indication of the entire community. SAM DIGHTON (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DELTA JUNCTION, spoke against building a prison in Delta Junction as it posed a possible threat to the children of that community. He recommended that the facility be used for some sort of tourist business or elderly care center. He urged Committee members not to make Delta Junction a "prison town". FRANK GOLD, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), FAIRBANKS, noted that he disagreed that this proposal came before the community of Delta Junction as it is proposed before the Finance Committee. He asked the reason for creating a monopoly in one area. If requirements are the same of those for the Department of Correction (DOC) employees, the proposal evades the State Employee Union and the salary requirements. It would permit a private agency to cut costs without paying the appropriate wages. He asked why the State should support a profit agency over a non-profit, if they are to have control over what is occurring. This proposal creates that scenario. The State would not have any control over the budget or the profit. He stressed that Delta Junction should keep ownership of Ft. Greely and lease the facility out. Mr. Gold emphasized that the facility should not be given away. He concluded testimony pointing out that there are many agencies throughout the United States willing to undertake business at Ft. Greely. GARY DAMRON, PUBLIC SAFETY EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION (PSEA), EAGLE RIVER, suggested that it is time that the people of the State Of Alaska look at the economics of what we undertake as a State. State dollars are getting fewer and further between. He spoke against privatization of prisons quoting reports from East Coast private prisons. Those prisons have proven not to be cost effective, they jeopardize public safety and do not treat their employees well. Prisoners in their care are not treated in the same manner as those in State facilities with regard too educational or rehabilitation programming. The Alaska Department of Corrections is the finest correctional system in the United States. There are excellent programs in alcohol treatment, sex and drug treatment, mental health treatment and in education. All of these programs are cost effective and reduce the repeat offender populations that other states must contend with. The State Of Alaska also has the safest system in the United States. (Tape Change HFC 98- 16, Side 1). Mr. Damron reiterated, studies have determined that the costs for a bed and meals per day would be 1% less than in a private facility. All factors considered, a public facility is cheaper and safer. Private facility interests lay not in public safety but in profit margin. One way they cut costs is by cutting staff. Mr. Damron elaborated that Governor Knowles has released a comprehensive plan to expand regional facilities. He agreed that costs would be expensive, as housing prisoners is expensive. DOC can do it cheaper than that of a private firm. He contended that the Department should be able to bid on the facility. Co-Chair Therriault asked if cost quotes had included the debt reimbursement. Mr. Damron replied that the debt load of both facilities had been counted into the surveys. The overall savings of bed and meals will be 1%. Co-Chair Therriault asked if a private firm did open in Delta Junction, would PSEA try to organize those workers. Mr. Damron noted most certainly. Co-Chair Therriault requested the Department of Corrections position on the proposed legislation. BILL PARKER, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, responded that the Governor has proposed HB 368, legislation which is the Department's proposal to expand; an expansion which does not include beds in Delta Junction. Co-Chair Therriault asked if HB 53 passed, what would the Department recommend to the Governor. Mr. Parker stated that the Department would recommend that the best use of State resources would not be to build those beds. That undertaking would be more expensive at Delta Junction. Mr. Parker noted that HB 53 highlights the need that the State has to expand the system. He pointed out that the State is currently 1200 beds short and 500 beds over the Court established cap. The need clearly exists. The criteria the Department used to address the prison crisis was: 1. The facilities are safe. 2. The facilities meet the statewide comprehensive goal. 3. The facilities employee the best correctional practices. 4. The community named must want the prison. 5. The facility will be cost effective. Ft. Greely does not meet two of those standards. That facility would not fit with the statewide plan and would not be the most cost effective bed space. Representative Mulder asked if Mr. Parker would recommend that the Governor veto the bill. Mr. Parker noted that it would not be his place to recommend a veto on any proposed legislation. It is safe to say that the Department has considered other ways to expand and has chosen another route. Representative Mulder asked what the Courts option would be if the Legislature passed the bill and the Governor vetoed it. Mr. Parker agreed that would place all parties in a bind. In response to Representative Kelly, Mr. Parker stated that the per diem cost for inmates is just over $100 per day statewide. Overcrowding makes the daily cost go down. Representative Kelly asked if there were any facilities that approached the per day cost in Arizona. Mr. Parker acknowledged that Arizona had the cheapest beds, although, transportation and medical costs must be added to that price. Representative Mulder noted that with all costs included, the daily price per bed in Arizona was $77 dollars. Mr. Parker concluded, noting that the total Governor's proposed budget would be $88 million dollars. He emphasized that adding wings to an already existing facility is cheaper than building a new facility. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that the attraction of the proposal is that the facility would not be built from scratch and that a structure already exists. HB 53 was HELD in Committee for further consideration. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:40 p.m. H.F.C. 18 2/03/98