This press release contains statements as to the Company’s beliefs
and expectations of the outcome of future events that are
forward-looking statements as defined within the meaning of the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These
forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties
that could cause actual results to differ materially from the
statements made. These include, but are not limited to, the risks
and uncertainties associated with: (i) fluctuations in the Company’s
operating results because of, among other things, changes in
occupancy levels, competition, increases in cost of operations,
fluctuations in interest rates and risks of operations; (ii) changes
the risks
and uncertainties associated with: …
the public acceptance of the Company’s services,
the timing of the
opening of and demand for new prison facilities and the commencement
of new management contracts; (iii) the Company’s ability to obtain
and maintain correctional facility management contracts….
in the privatization of the corrections and detention industry,
the public acceptance of the Company’s services, the timing of the
opening of and demand for new prison facilities and the commencement
of new management contracts; (iii) the Company’s ability to obtain
and maintain correctional facility management contracts, including
as a result of sufficient governmental appropriations and as a
result of inmate disturbances; (iv) increases in costs to construct
or expand correctional facilities that exceed original estimates, or
the inability to complete such projects on schedule as a result of
various factors, many of which are beyond the Company’s control,
such as weather, labor conditions and material shortages, resulting
in increased construction costs; and (v) general economic and market
conditions. Other factors that could cause operating and financial
results to differ are described in the filings made from time to
time by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
So maybe we should drum up some community opposition to
the private prison the Valdosta-Lowndes County Industrial Authority (VLCIA)
wants CCA to build in Lowndes County, Georgia.
What ideas do you have to go beyond
the petition?
CCA has
a contract
to buy
the private prison site from a private landowner.
But who did that landowner get the site from?
The Industrial Authority!
And the sale prices involved are rather interesting: the landowner gets almost 100% profit in five years.
One person I showed them to immediately said, “sweetheart deal.”
What do you think?
The Valdosta-Lowndes County Industrial Authority (VLCIA)
bought the site back in 1998 for $1,243,200, and
sold it to the landowner in 2007 for 1,463,512, which is an increase of
about 18%
in almost 10 years or about 2% per year.
CCA can buy it from the landowner in 2012 for $2,907,000,
for an increase of 99% in about five years or almost 20% per year.
Which is far more than the 20% in five years or about 4% per year shown by the assessed value.
And this remarkable surge in the price of that land
is during the worst real estate market since the Great Depression.
CCA is the leading participant in, and in many ways the embodiment
of, one of the most controversial industries ever created—the
incarceration of people for profit. While the company is looking
back through rose-colored glasses, there is a need for a critical
analysis of what CCA has brought to the world of corrections. That
is the purpose of this report.
Even by its own standards, CCA has not been a success. Rather than
taking the industry by storm, it still manages only about three
percent of prison and jail beds in the United States, and its global
aspirations had to be abandoned.
Only a few years ago, CCA was being widely vilified
Just a quick recap of a meeting I had yesterday with VLCIA’s Andrea
Schruijer. When asked where we were with the private prison issue, she
responded, “we contractually agreed to a 3rd extension with a term of
365 and CCA has until March 13, 2012 to request that extension.” So I
asked,” if CCA doesn’t request a
3rd extension, then the issue is over,
right?” She replied, “If there’s no response from CCA, then it is up to
the board to determine how to move forward.” When I asked her why they
would even consider honoring a contract extension to CCA knowing some
of the controversy over CCA’s business practices, she replied, “because
there is a partnership between the VLCIA and CCA and we are
contractually bound to a 3rd extension.”
I pointed out that the private prison industry wasn’t interested in
public safety and rehabilitation they simply wanted to make a quick
buck off the lives of others. I informed her of the chronic employee
turnover, understaffing, high rates of violence and extreme cost
cutting which all have been attributed to CCA.
I told her that Lowndes County already had its own share of air
pollution and that amount of air pollution here is directly
proportionate to the amount of lung and bronchial caner in our area. I
encouraged her to consider sustainable businesses for the future
economic growth of our community, not smoke stack business. Her reply,
“so what you are saying is that you think the industrial should just
close its doors?” I actually hadn’t thought about that but the
question did make me ponder.
I left her with
a 91 page research report which takes a critical look
at the first twenty years of CCA’s operations. I requested an email
response of her thoughts about the report and am currently awaiting the
response…
Biomass did come up in the conversation and Mrs. Schruijer was quick to
assert that
CCA’s CEO Damon Hininger stands to benefit should the states provide
him with prisons well-stocked with prisoners. In 2010, for example,
his total compensation equaled $3,266,387.
4. Damon T. Hininger
Corrections Corporation of America
Market cap: $2.83 billion
Age: 40
Industry: Property management
How do you like that euphemism?
“Property management.”
Does that refer to the real estate, or to the prisoners?
Or maybe to captive local government agencies that cede CCA
“absolute discretion”?
Valdosta City Council and Mayor, who may not have been following the private prison issue,
now know about it and are aware that they are all implicated in the private prison
decision, due to events at the Industrial Authority board meeting
and the Valdosta City Council meeting, both Thursday 23 February 2012.
After remarking that I’d rather be talking about the additional solar panels
recently installed on my farm workshop up here in the north end of the county,
I recapped the
case against a private prison
and referred the Valdosta City Council to
my LTE in the VDT of that morning
(Thursday 23 February 2012).
I remarked that I was disappointed the Industrial Authority
hadn’t done anything to stop the prison at its meeting earlier that same day.
Since they might be wondering what all this had to do with them, I pointed out that,
if I could use the word,
they were all implicated as mayor and council
in the private prison decision because
Jay Hollis, CCA’s Manager of Site Acquisition, in his Valdosta-Lowndes County, GA / CCA Partnership: Prepared Remarks of August 2010,
lavishly praised the Lowndes County Commission and Chairman and the
Valdosta City Council and mayor.
Although the mayor was different now, and maybe some of the council,
nonetheless it was the same offices of council and mayor, still implicated.
I asked for their opinions on that subject.
Per their custom, they did not offer any at that time.
So, maybe we’ll hear from them later.
Or maybe the Industrial Authority board will hear from them….
Valdosta Mayor and Council are implicated in the private prison —John S. Quarterman @ VCC 2012 02 23
VSEB, employment,
Regular Session, Valdosta City Council (VCC),
Valdosta, Lowndes County, Georgia, 23 February 2012.
Videos by George Boston Rhynes for K.V.C.I., the bostongbr on YouTube.
The only thing a board member said about it was Chairman Roy Copeland
reminding me that the board didn’t answer questions in Citizens Wishing
to be Heard.
Col. Ricketts added that in staff’s discussions with CCA,
CCA had indicated they were mulling it over internally, and
VLCIA should “stand by” for CCA’s next move.
That’s right, your local Industrial Authority, whose staff and land purchases
are funded by your tax dollars, should stand by waiting for a private
prison company to tell them what to do.
And the Industrial Authority board’s silence is an answer:
they said nothing different from their previous vote for the contract
to bring in this private prison;
nothing different from their previous acceptance
of the first and second option extensions;
and nothing in objection to what Col. Ricketts said.
So your tax-supported Industrial Authority wants a private prison in
Lowndes County, Georgia.
Do you want that?
Do you want a private prison with fewer guards per prisoner
Continue reading →
Do you know why the county sold this property for less than the assessed
price to the current owner in 2007 minus the wetlands that interject? Did
they know it would be considered for a private prison at that time? Now
the current owner will make the million dollar profit instead of the
county. Since this is considered industrial park acerage owned by the
county why would the county sell it if an industry/business was not
promised at that time? What is the 100 acres the development agreement
says the owner will be given? Is that the 119 acres of wetlands? If
the county decides not to allow the private prison what happens to the
earnest money that has been deposited to date since that would not be
an action by the buyer or the seller?
The seller was not the Lowndes County Commission, which would start with
“LOWNDES COUNTY”, and it’s not the City of Valdosta, which wouldn’t be
hyphenated with the county name like that.
Could it be the Valdosta-Lowndes County Industrial Authority?
Industrial Authority Executive Director Andrea Schruijer told me to expect
their board to say something at their 2PM Thursday board meeting about the
private prison Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) wants to build
on US 84 at Perimeter Road. If they don’t give CCA another extension,
the contract expires March 13th.
There’s still time to contact them, (229) 259-9972.
Or go to their board meeting at 101 North Ashley Street,
2PM Thursday February 23rd.
A private prison would not increase employment in Lowndes County. It
would not even save the state money. And it would have high risk
of closing after or even before it opened, because of escapes and
inmate disturbances, and most importantly because the state and federal
governments can no longer afford to incarcerate so many people. That would
leave us and the state holding the bag for any investment in building it.
Outsourcing public justice for private profit at taxpayer expense is
not only bad business, we the taxpayers can’t afford to pay for it while
public education is under increasing budgetary pressure.
As members of the local community, we do not wish to live in a private
prison colony, with the attendant risks of inmate violence and escape,
and the accompanying public opprobrium that would drive away the
knowledge-based workers we claim to be trying to attract.
Finally, public justice should not be a matter of private profit.
John S. Quarterman
lives in Lowndes County
You may recognize the wording from the
petition.
You can always write your own letter with your own reasons.
Yesterday Andrea Schruijer promised to get an agenda for
tomorrow’s 2PM Thursday 23 February 2012 Industrial Authority board meeting (101 N. Ashley Street)
online.
It’s
there,
and it has content!
What it does not have is any mention of
anything about Project Excel, or CCA, or the private prison,
even though Ms. Schruijer told me yesterday to expect the board
to say something about that.
You can still
express your opinion to them before then.
And since this agenda says
**TENTATIVE**
maybe that item will get added before tomorrow afternoon.
What this agenda does have is numerous specific items
under the usual broad headers such as
Existing Industry/Project Report.
So instead of listening to Col. Ricketts
and trying to figure out what he’s talking about,
you can see such things as
“e-Snychronist® Existing Industry Retention
and Expansion business information system (BIS)” in writing.
You still don’t see names of the
“five (5) Prospects”
or the “three (3) companies that are developing expansion plans”.
Maybe I buy the competitive information argument for the prospects,
but I’m not so sure about the three expanding companies, especially
if they’re already local.
And considering the things VLCIA has tried to sneak in under cover
of not mentioning competitive information, such as biomass and a private prison,
I’m not sure I buy that argument at all.
Also on the plus side, the agenda includes an actual schedule for bids
Continue reading →
Damon Hininger being appointed CEO:
