Pubdate: Wed, 03 Mar 2010
Source: Terrace Standard (CN BC)
Copyright: 2010 Terrace Standard
Contact: http://www.terracestandard.com
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1329
Author: Kat Lee
JAIL RESTS ON BOOSTING PRISONER TOTAL
THE CITY is banking on the federal government sending more people to
jail for longer periods of time if its hope of an economy-boosting
jail here is to be realized.
A city co-sponsored feasibility study lists three pieces of
legislation the federal government wants passed, each one of which
would result in more people headed for federal jail cells.
One piece of legislation calls for minimum sentences for serious drug
cases, another would end the practice of lopping off two days for
every day a person is sentenced if that person has been in jail since
first arrested and another would impose mandatory jail time for fraud.
The new sentence requirements could boost the federal jail population
by 70 per cent, the study suggests.
The $4,000 study, cost shared fifty-fifty between the city and
Northern Development Initiative (NDI) Trust, also quotes a newspaper
article citing a federal plan to spend nearly $500 million on jails
between 2011 and 2013.
City council and NDI commissioned the study last fall.
NDI chief executive officer Janine North said that while it doesn't
tell any municipality what ideas to explore, it will help provide more
information.
NDI is a regional economic development corporation that aims to
stimulate economic diversification and job creation in the region.
"Terrace is a community that is looking how to diversify and expand
its tax base," she said, pointing out that a provincial jail in Prince
George has had a positive economic impact for that community.
The Terrace feasibility study forecasts a facility holding 400
prisoners would cost $170 million to build and have an annual
operating budget of $42 million.
A location has already been picked out - 15 to 20 hectares within the
proposed airport lands industrial park.
"As we see the industry base weakening....one should explore other
options that aren't as cyclical," North said.
The study also says that a facility located in rural northern B.C.
would allow inmates to stay near their home communities, and points
out that technology makes it easier for inmates to receive sentencing,
visitations, and specialized counselling services through video links.
"In B.C., there certainly has been some controversy over the past
couple of years of communities wanting or not wanting correctional
facilities in the Lower Mainland," North said.
"I think that in the north, we tend to be more open to exploring a
fact base before saying 'not in my backyard.' And with recent changes
federally, and with money that is in provincial and federal budgets
targeted in the next several years for new facilities...it's a
reasonable question to ask how they impact the economy."
Terrace mayor Dave Pernarwoski raised the prospect of a federal jail
in a presentation to provincial politicians in Victoria recently.
And Terrace city council recently invited Skeena NDP MLA Robin Austin
to a meeting, requesting his help in lobbying the federal government
for such a facility.
For his part, Austin said it is best to start with Skeena-Bulkley
Valley MP Nathan Cullen.
Austin later said he'd be in a better position to assist if the city
wanted a provincial jail.
There was a provincial jail here but it was closed as a provincial
cost-saving measure in 2002.
Austin said it made no sense to close the jail because it provided
jobs and kept inmates close to families.
The city has now asked Cullen for a meeting to take place later this
month.
The following is the feasibility study prepared by the Northern
Development Initiative Trust and the City of Terrace on the prospect
of building a federal prison here.
The study is entitled, The Economic Impact of a Rural Correctional
Facility. An Opportunity for Terrace, British Columbia.
Executive Summary
The construction of a new correctional facility in Terrace, BC would
provide socio-economic benefits directly to the community and
surrounding areas. Not only will the economy benefit from
jobs created for construction and operating within the community, but
the sociological benefits of interning prisoners near their
communities and families should not be discounted.
There is a foreseeable increase in sentence terms and numbers
of inmates which will necessitate additional inmate capacity.
Currently there is insufficient capacity to absorb any
significant increase in inmate populations. Existing public
opinion is against increased prisoner capacity to be built in
high density population centres and future locations should in
communities that support the undertaking.
The community of Terrace has expressed interest and support
as a location of a future correctional facility. An
appropriate location has been identified for construction of a
new correctional facility. The economic impact of a new
facility within the community would be approximately $170
million in construction costs with an annual operating budget of $42
million.
Over a 20 year period, the construction and operations of a
new correctional facility in Terrace would have a direct economic
impact of $862 million.
Introduction
The construction of new correctional facilities is required to
support expected increased inmate populations in the next
three to five years. The placement of new facilities should
be in locations and communities that support them.
This makes it easier to move forward with the facilities and
provides significant economic opportunities for those
communities.
This report examines the basis for new correctional
facilities, the economic impact from construction and operations,
and the overall benefit to Terrace, a rural community in Northern
British Columbia.
Background
A number of bills introduced by the federal government in
the House of Commons are expected to be passed into law.
These bills are expected to have an impact on inmate
population in both federal and provincial correctional facilities.
Bill C-15: Minimum Sentences
On February 27, 2009 the Minister of Justice, the Honourable Robert
Nicholson, introduced in the House of Commons Bill C-15 to amend
the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Library of Parliament,
2009a).
Bill C-15 seeks to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances
Act ("CDSA") and thereby the Criminal Code to impose minimum
sentences for certain serious drug offenses such as dealing
drugs for organized crime purposes or when a weapon or violence is
involved.
Bill C-15 specifically mentions that in 2006/07 that
approximately fifty percent of all drug-related court cases do
not result in convictions and convictions rarely result in
sentencing incarceration. The majority of offenders only receive
probation. This data has drawn the conclusion that there are
not sufficient penalties defined in the CDSA to act as a dete rrent.
Currently the CDSA does impose maximum penalties for drug
offences but there are currently no mandatory minimum penalties
for drug related offences. Primarily the CDSA offences include
possession, "double doctoring," trafficking, importing and
exporting, and production of substances denoted within the CDSA.
Bill C-25: Credit for Time Served
On March 27, 2009 the Minister of Justice also introduced in
the House Bill C-25 to amend the Criminal Code to limit the
credit a judge may allow for any time spent in
pre-sentencing custody (Library of Parliament, 2009b). This
limit is meant to reduce the "credit for time served" and
impose longer incarceration periods. Bill C-25 is also known as the
Truth in Sentencing Act.
Currently the Criminal Code allows the courts to take into
consideration time spent in pre-sentencing custody. According
to the Criminal Code the court is not required to do so;
however the Supreme Court of Canada has the opinion that
courts must justify any reason for not reducing sentences by
taking into account pre-sentencing custody time (R. v. Wust, 2000).
This has resulted in the majority of cases whereby sentencing
convictions are reduced by double or, in some jurisdictions,
triple time spent in pre-sentencing custody. This has provided
an incentive for in-custody accused expecting to be convicted
to maximize the pre-sentencing custody timeframe to ultimately
minimize the resulting incarceration time. The changes
introduced in Bill C-25 will result in a one day for one
day recognition of pre-sentencing custody or in rare occasions
one and one-half days when pre-sentencing custody is determined to
have circumstances that warrant greater recognition.
Bill C-52: Mandatory Jail Sentence for Fraud
On October 21, 2009 the Minister of Justice also introduced in the
House Bill C-52 to amend the Criminal Code (Sentencing for Fraud)
and creates a mandatory jail sentence for fraud over $1
million (Library of Parliament, 2009c). Bill C-52 is also
known as the Retribution on Behalf of Victims of White Collar
Crime Act.
The aim of Bill C-52 is to provide restitution for victims
of large scale fraud and permit the courts to impose
mandatory jail sentences after consideration of victim and
community impact statements.
Generally these impact statements will provide the courts with
additional factors when considering sentencing such as the
financial and psychological impact of the fraud on the
victim(s) and their resulting circumstances.
Inmate Population Implications
All of these bills will result in significant increases in prison
populations. The minimum increase for Bill C- 15 alone is expected
to be 10% (Scoffield, 2009) and together the bills have the
possibility of increasing prison populations of upwards to 70%.
When the United States implemented similar sentencing
policies
in 1985 there was an increase in prison populations over 15 years of
700% (Drucker, 1999).
The volume of incarcerated offenders has reached critical
capacity, evidenced by inmate-to-cell occupancy levels averaging 185
per cent in provincial correctional facilities (Ministry of Public
Safety and Solicitor General, 2009). The challenge for many of
these facilities are that they were constructed in 1800s and
early 1900s, are expensive to maintain and difficult to increase
inmate capacity. It has been recommended that construction of
mixed-use regional facilities be constructed to both deal with
organic prison population growth and the likely results of a
tough on crime political approach.
These mixed-use facilities would incorporate distinct minimum,
medium, and maximum security areas within a common complex.
These regional complexes could have as few as 500 inmates up
to a maximum of 2,000 (Correctional Services Canada Review Panel,
2007).
The regional complexes would be outfitted with advanced
technology to permit video remand, sentencing, and visitation.
The benefit of regional complexes is a model of more
effectively correctional management and reduced cost as inmates
would not be required to be transported for court hearings,
change of status from remand to sentence, or to facilitate
visitation.
Additionally population density within a facility would allow
inmates to access a broader range of support services such
as physical health, mental health, drug treatment programs, et
cetera without being required to be transported offsite for
specialized support.
The maintenance of inmates within the same regional facility
from remand, during the sentence, and reintegration also has
benefits of improve community and familial relationships and
support to improve quality of life issues (Canadian Families and
Corrections Network, 2007).
An independent review commissioned by Correctional Services
Canada conducted by Deloitte & Touche suggested that moving
forward with "business as usual" methodologies and practices
should not be applied to the regional complex model and "new
operating approaches and standards" should be considered for this
new transformational business model.
Economic Impact Analysis
Correctional facilities have a significant and bone fide
economic impact on the communities they are situated within.
This impact is both during for capital and operational
reasons. Capital reasons include new construction and
infrastructure maintenance. Operational reasons include human
resources and consumable supplies required to house the inmates.
Capital Investment Budgets
During the period of 2008/09 through to 2012/13 the Province
of British Columbia initially expected to construct three
separate correctional facility projects for an estimated total
cost of $185 million (Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor
General, 2009).
This was prior to the three bills introduced in the House
this year which will likely require significant capital
investment across the country to build additional correctional
facilities to house the increased inmate population.
The federal government has budgeted $487.9 million for
correctional facility infrastructure from fiscal 2011 through to
fiscal 2013 (Curry, 2009).
It is projected that during the same fiscal periods a
capital budget of $817.1 million would be required to maintain
existing infrastructure and build incremental bed capacity
(Correctional Services Canada Review Panel, 2007).
For a minimum security cell the capital cost would be $200,000, for a
medium cell $400,000 and for a maximum cell, $400,000.
The mix would be 12 per cent minimum, 39 per cent medium and 49 per
cent maximum.
The capital cost to construct a regional complex is
attributed based on population mix and ranges from
approximately $212 million to $842 million (Deloitte, 2007).
Based on the lowest range of inmate population increases, a
minimum of 3,600 additional cells would be required for a
minimum capital cost of $1.53 billion.
British Columbia houses approximately 14.6% of the federally
incarcerated inmates and could be expected to invest at least
$256 million in capital correctional facility construction in
the next three years to meet minimum inmate population increases.
Facility Operating Cost
Federal and provincial data suggest a consistency of 2.06
inmates per employee in correctional facilities (Correctional
Service Canada, 2009; van Dongen, 2009). It is uncertain the
cost of inmate incarceration as there is a disparity of
operating costs across various jurisdictions. The news media
suggests the highest cost of $101,000 a year per male and
$185,000 a year per female (Jones & Pate, 2009) which is
assumed to be a maximum security cost. Financial reports from
Corrections Services Canada suggest a b lended average cost per
inmate of approximately $104,522 per year.
Ontario statistics suggest incarceration costs ranging from
$110,223 for male inmates and $150,867 for female inmates in
maximum security correctional facilities to a low of $70,000
for medium and minimum security correctional facilities (Basen, 2006).
Terrace Opportunity
The opportunity exists within rural Northern British Columbia
to construct a new correctional facility. A new facility
located in rural Northern British Columbia would be in
alignment with the beneficial effects of remanding inmates near
their home communities. The advent of technology is making it
easier for inmates to receive sentencing, visitations, and
specialized counselling services through video
conferencing.
It is proposed that a facility housing approximately 400
inmates could be constructed within the community of Terrace in
Northern British Columbia.
Background
The community of Terrace has expressed interest in exploring
the economic impact of constructing a potential correctional
facility in the community to support the growing need of new
facilities for inmates. It is normal practice for a
municipality to research information on new initiatives when
exploring economic opportunities.
Location
The proposed location for construction of a new correctional
facility location is in a planned light industrial near the
Terrace Airport (Figure 1). The industrial area is East of
Highway 16 and comprises approximately 114 hectares of land.
The needs for the new correctional facility would likely be
between 15 and 20 hectares.
The location is ideal for its proximity to the airport, and
access to highway 37 for transportation purposes.
It is also unlikely there would be any opposition to the
location due to its distance from residential
neighbourhoods.
Construction Economic Impact
It would be estimated that a 400 inmate population
correctional facility would maintain the typical housing
composition of minimum, medium, and maximum inmates. It would
be expected that total capital construction cost would be
approximately $170,000,000.00.
The size of the facility would be approximately 280,000
square feet of floor space. The construction process would
source raw materials, simple fabricated products, and skilled
labour from the local community. It is uncertain how much
those portions would comprise of the approximate construction
costs however it would be reasonable to assume that at least 20% of
total project costs.
According to the Correctional Service of Canada, the capital
construction process from the planning stage to full
occupation for a new facility would be approximately 15 years.
This period is considered to be extremely long and
disproportionate of the typical construction period of large
capital projects. It would be expected that the time frame could be
reduced by approximately 60% to five years.
Operations Economic Impact
Utilizing details from the Correctional Service of Canada a
correctional facility in Terrace would require a n annual
operating budget of approximately $42 million. This operating budget
encompasses all inmate costs and facility maintenance costs. Of
that operating budget, approximately 68%, or $28.5 million, of
the budget is for payroll and benefits costs which are
primarily spent within the local community (Correctional Service
Canada, 2008).
Of the remaining budget, it is uncertain how much of the
operating and maintenance costs would be spent within the
local community. It is reasonable to assume that a portion of
the remaining budget would be spent within the community of Terrace.
Conclusion
The construction of a new 400 inmate correctional facility in
Terrace would provide direct economic impacts over the next
20 years of approximately $862 million dollars assuming an
annual inflation rate over that period of two (2%) percent.
The support of the community for this type of facility would
also ease the process and provide greater involvement with the
inmate population and their families to improve the overall
quality of life and outcomes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D