|
Daniel Webster College
Nashua, New Hampshire
Aramark
July 17, 2009 FOX 25
This information was supplied by law enforcement and describes recent arrests
and charges. All defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven
guilty in a court of law. On July 16, 2009 at approximately 8:00 am, Nashua
Police Department Youth Services arrested Sharon Delio,
age 46, on an arrest warrant obtained from the Nashua District Court charging
her with Theft By Unauthorized Taking or Transfer, Consolidation, Class A
Felony. An investigation by Nashua detectives revealed that Ms. Delio had stolen approximately $40,000 from her employer,
Aramark Corporation, between June 2008 and June 2009. Ms. Delio
was the Assistant Food Service Director at Daniel Webster College in Nashua,
a client of Aramark Corporation.
New Hampshire Legislature
Thu May 2, 2013 nhpr.org
On a 13-11 vote, the New Hampshire
Senate has blocked a House-backed measure to prohibit private prisons in the
state. Senate Republicans killed the prohibition effort, saying that the
legislature needs to be able to keep all options on the table. Senator Andy
Sanborn told colleagues that private prisons can be more efficient, lowering
overall corrections costs. "I believe we have an obligation to prove to
the tax payers of New Hampshire, every day, that we
are trying to spend their money wisely." But Senator David Pierce, a
Democrat from Etna, says privatization turns inmates into commodities.
"To delegate that power, and that authority, to entities whose success
depends on how much profit they can exploit from each human being, invites
abuse, it abdicates our responsibility to our prison population for their
rehabilitation, and our commitment to restorative justice." Last month,
the state rejected four companies’ proposals to take over New Hampshire
prisons. State officials said the bids lacked proof that the firms could meet
requirements for inmate medical care.
April 3,
2013 inzanetimes.wordpress.com
New
Hampshire will not privatize its prisons, at least not in the near
future. That’s the decision announced by the state today with the
release of a long-awaited analysis of bids submitted by four private firms in
response to a 2011 Request for Proposals from the state. The state’s
consultant, MGT of America, found that none of the bids met the requirements
spelled out in the RFP. All of them “had deficiencies from an
operational standpoint.” [Click here for the report from MGT of America.
Specifically, according to a parallel report released by the Departments of
Corrections and Administrative Services, “all were non-compliant with meeting
the Department of Corrections’ legal obligations.” “More specifically, the
proposals exhibited a lack of understanding of the overarching legal
requirements placed upon the DOC relating to the court orders, consent
decrees and settlements which, in large part, dictate the administration and
operation of their correctional facilities and attendant services to the
inmate populations,” the state agencies said. The agencies concluded, “The
immediate next step, taken in conjunction with the release of this report, is
the formal cancellation of the solicitation process. This decision, based
upon the detail provided above, is made in the best interests of the State.”
That the private industry leaders were not able to explain how they would actually
meet the state’s legal obligations should be seen as evidence that these
companies can’t be trusted to operate prisons anywhere. MGT also reported
that the staff compensation levels built into the privatization proposals was
“one-half of the current compensation currently paid to similar positions in
the state.” “The state should be concerned that this significantly lower wage
may make it difficult to maintain a trained and experienced staff. This could
result in high turnover and ultimately impact the safety and security of the
correctional facilities,” MGT added. “In prior MGT studies of private
correctional facility operations,” the report elaborated, “we
have found private correctional facilities with annual staff turnover rates
of 42 percent compared to 13.3 percent for nearby public facilities. High
turnover, which can result from non-competitive compensation levels, produces
a chronically inexperienced work force with direct implications for the
integrity of facility security and safety. Low compensation levels can also
make staff recruitment more difficult, resulting in staff vacancies and
reliance on overtime, which again has a negative impact upon facility
security.” The state’s report leaves open the possibility that the state
would entertain privatization as an option at some point in the future.
That would be a huge mistake. Instead, the legislature should pass HB
443, a bill that blocks the state from considering privatization. This
measure has already passed the NH House and comes before the Senate Finance
Committee next Tuesday.
March 21.
2013 unionleader.com
CONCORD --
The House on Thursday voted to forbid the executive branch from privatizing
the state prison system, saying that to do so would shirk the state’s
constitutional responsibility to rehabilitate inmates. The 197-136 roll call
by the Democratic -controlled House sent House Bill 443 to the Senate, where
Republicans hold a slim, 13-11 majority and the bill’s fate is uncertain, at
best. The legislation, while prohibiting prison privatization, allows the
governor to enter into a temporary contract with a private provider during
times of a “corrections emergency” with the approval of the Executive
Council. The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee had
recommended that the bill pass on a 13-5 vote. Those who opposed the bill
said that with a study of privatization underway, it is premature to have a
ban take effect. A move to table pending more information on privatization
failed. Rep. Dan McGuire, R-Epsom, argued that the state should not prevent
itself from undertaking a private option. He said the prison population is
expanding. But Rep. Robert Cushing, D-Hampton, privatizing prisons “is
different than talking about who is going to pick up our garbage and plow our
roads. “I don’t think we should be outsourcing incarceration,” he said. He
said the state constitution requires the state to rehabilitate its prisoners,
“yet there is a financial incentive for a private operator to keep those
cells filled” and “fill corporate coffers. “When we take somebody’s liberty
away from them, those who are overseeing that bondage should be responsible
to the Governor of New Hampshire as opposed to a corporate entity,” said
Cushing. House Republican Leader Gene Chandler argued unsuccessfully that
with a study underway, “There are facts coming in on the issue and we have an
obligation to look at the facts.”
December 5, 2012 Concord
Monitor
The Executive Council voted yesterday to continue studying privatizing the
state’s prisons, but going private has lost its biggest supporters at the
State House. Incoming governor Maggie Hassan opposes putting inmate care in
private hands, as does a majority of the next Executive Council. And
Democrats, who have taken control of the House, haven’t shared their
Republican counterparts’ appetite for privatization. But partial
privatization – allowing a private company to build a prison the state would
run – may have support in at least the corner office. Gov. John Lynch
endorsed that approach in an interview this week with Monitor editors, saying
it’s the state’s most expedient option for not only replacing the state’s
inadequate prisons but also resolving a lawsuit over the shortcomings of the
women’s prison. That’s especially true, Lynch said, with a Legislature that’s
been unwilling to spend the necessary $350 million to $400 million to build a
new prison. And in an email Tuesday, a spokesman for Hassan said a
private-public partnership is an option she’d consider. “Governor-Elect
Hassan opposes allowing private entities to run New Hampshire’s prisons, as
the track record of such arrangements in other states has not demonstrated
success in terms of protecting taxpayer dollars while maintaining the highest
level of public safety,” wrote Marc Goldberg. “The Governor-Elect would
consider the possibility of partnering with the private sector on prison
construction only if the safety and security of our communities could be
ensured along with clear savings to taxpayers.” The state began investigating
privatizing the state’s prisons last year at the request of Lynch and state
lawmakers, who wondered whether going private would save the state money.
Prison expenses are climbing and two prisons – the men’s in Concord and the
women’s in Goffstown – are overcrowded and failing.
September 6, 2012 Nashua
Telegraph
As New Hampshire corrections and administrative personnel continue working
with a consulting firm being paid $171,000 to evaluate proposals and weigh
the pros and cons of privatizing a majority of the state’s prison system, a
national expert on the subject is warning politicians and residents to step
carefully and warily if the state goes down that path. Arizona resident
Caroline Isaacs, program director of the American Friends Service Committee’s
Tucson office, brought her expertise and thoughts on the subject to Nashua’s
Unitarian Universalist Church on Wednesday night as part of her three-day,
statewide speaking tour. Her extensive research and extensive writings
culminated in “Private Prisons, the Public’s Problem: A Quality Assessment of
Arizona’s Private Prisons.” “There’s a general belief that corporate
privatization is more efficient and cost-effective,” Isaacs told about two
dozen listeners. “But when you take a bureaucracy and put a for-profit
corporation on top of it, it’s not the case at all.” Isaacs’ expertise is
especially relevant in New Hampshire, as three of the four for-profit prison
entities that submitted bids have built and are operating prisons in her home
state. Though the contents of the bids haven’t become public, the
corporations – Corrections Corporations of America, The GEO Group and
Management and Training Corp. – fared poorly in Isaacs’ comprehensive
analyses. The consensus found “a widespread and persistent problems in
private facilities around safety, lack of accountability, and cost,” Isaacs
wrote in her account, which was published in February – the same week the
N.H. Executive Council voted 5-0 to hire Texas-based consultant MGT of
America. Former Executive Councilor Debora Pignatelli, of Nashua, who is
running for the District 5 seat she lost in 2010, said that if the state goes
the way of privatization, it had better make sure it has air-tight agreements
with the corporations. “The contracts need to be very, very clear that if
(the firms) don’t live up to the terms, they can be held accountable,”
Pignatelli said. To view Isaacs’ report, visit www.afsc.org /resource/arizona-prison-report.
September 5, 2012 Concord
Monitor
If New Hampshire privatizes its prisons, it will spend more, not less, and
risk losing control of corrections for good, according to activist Caroline
Isaacs, who's in the state this week lobbying against private prisons.
Isaacs, program director for the American Friends Service Committee in
Tucson, Ariz., issued a blistering report in February about Arizona's several
private prisons. Isaacs found security in private prisons lacking, staff
poorly trained and the cost of housing an inmate higher at private prisons
than at state-run prisons, according to her report. And, none of the private
companies are measuring recidivism, according to her report. Aware that New
Hampshire is considering hiring one of the three private prison companies
operating in Arizona, Isaacs accepted an invitation from the New Hampshire
chapter of the American Friends Service Committee to visit the state.
"New Hampshire is at a critical juncture," Isaacs told a group of
about 40 people yesterday at the University of New Hampshire School of Law.
"You have not stepped off the cliff like we have in Arizona. This is the
time when you and your elected officials need to be asking questions."
The Rev. Alice Roberts, an Episcopal priest in Newport, had one yesterday:
How can she get lawmakers' attention when private prison companies have well-paid
lobbyists at the State House? Roberts is a member of the prison concern
committee of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire, and intends to ask all
the state's Episcopalians to join the committee in opposing private prisons.
Isaacs's answer? Begin with the money argument, not the morality argument. It
costs $48.42 a day to house an inmate at a state-run prison in Arizona,
according to the state's own estimates. It costs $53.02 a day to provide the
same security and services at one of the private prisons. Why then, UNH Law
professor Erin Corcoran asked, do states still pursue privatization?
"The facts fly in the face of what most people assume is true,"
said Isaacs. "They have always been told that private enterprise does
everything better. "Even when you write 100 pages showing that is not
happening," Isaacs added, referring to her February report. New
Hampshire began contemplating privatizing prisons last year at the direction
of the Legislature and Gov. John Lynch. Four for-profit prison companies have
submitted bids to build a men's-only prison and a hybrid prison that would
house men and women on the same campus. The state has not committed to
privatizing prisons. Instead, the request for bids has been billed as an
information-gathering exercise to determine whether the state would save
money if a private company took over corrections. It's
possible, state officials have said, the state will conclude it's cheaper to
continue running corrections itself. That's increasingly possible given the
upcoming gubernatorial election. The three Democratic candidates, Jackie Cilley, Maggie Hassan and Bill Kennedy, and Republican Ovide Lamontagne have said they oppose privatizing
prisons. Republican Kevin Smith has not endorsed the idea but has said he'll
take a wait-and-see approach. In looking at Arizona's private prisons, Isaacs
found consistent problems with staffing, accountability and security, she
said. • Following the escape of three inmates from one private prison, it was
discovered that the prison's security system had been malfunctioning for two
years. The company knew about the problem but never fixed it, Isaacs said. •
Private prison companies don't include the costs of treating, educating or
transporting inmates in their contract costs, she said. States that don't
write contracts insisting those costs be covered will end up paying those
expense separately. • Wages are lower at private prisons, she said. In
Arizona, correctional officers were earning between $18 and $20 an hour at
state-run prisons. At the private prisons, they were making between $10 and
$12 an hour, she said. • The consequence of low wages has been high turnover,
Isaacs said. As a result, a high percentage of private prison staff are
inexperienced because they are new. And private companies cut costs by
skimping on training, she said. So the staff are not
only new, but also poorly trained. • Accountability is a problem at private
prisons, especially when it comes to medical treatment and counseling. She
gave an example of an inmate who complained to his family that he was not
getting his medications. When the family called the prison, staff told them
to call state corrections officials. The state directed the family back to
the private prison. • States can find it difficult to get out of a bad
contract. Isaacs said even if a state can break a contract without a heavy
financial penalty, it's still stuck because it has nowhere else to house the
inmates. The private companies operating in Arizona - the GEO Group;
Management & Training Corp. and Corrections Corp. of America - are each
seeking contracts in New Hampshire. Isaacs was asked whether her report could
be fairly applied outside of Arizona. "It's a cautionary tale," she
said.
August 19, 2012 Union
Leader
Three out-of-state companies vying to build a new men’s prison in New
Hampshire have paid more than $130,000 in lobbyist fees to three Concord
firms to win support for their proposal, according to state records.
Corrections Corporation of America, based in Nashville, Tenn., outpaced its rivals,
providing more than $101,000 to the Rath, Young and
Pignatelli law firm since 2011, according to a New Hampshire Sunday News
review of lobbyist income and expense reports. “Generally speaking, because
governments are our partners, we obviously educate through government
relations,” CCA spokesman Mike Machak said in an
email. “It’s how we transparently share information about the services and
solutions we provide and make sure we’re up to date on any specific needs
they may have.” The law firm, which includes a section devoted to government
relations, reported it spent all $101,729.85 it collected in lobbying fees
from CCA since 2011. State law requires lobbyists to submit certain financial
information regarding its clients. According to paperwork lobbyists must
submit to the Secretary of State’s Office, lobbyists are required to report
all fees “that are related, directly or indirectly, to lobbying, including
fees for services such as public advocacy, government relations, or public
relations services including research, monitoring legislation, and related
legal work.” David Collins, director of government relations at the Concord
law firm, deferred questions to CCA, which declined to talk specifically
about its lobbying efforts in New Hampshire. William McGonagle,
the state’s assistant corrections commissioner, said he’s aware of the
lobbyists, but said the process for reviewing proposals is private at this
point. “They’re out there,” McGonagle said. “I know
they’re out there talking with legislators and the like.” The Legislature
would need to approve funding any new prison received, he said. Fran Wendelboe, a former legislator and current registered
lobbyist not involved in the prison proposals, said lobbyists can prove to be
powerful forces. “On many occasions, they write the ... legislation,” Wendelboe said. “The lobbyists are considered the expert
or who they represent are considered the experts.” Four companies submitted
proposals — some topping $100 million — to build the prison. Some call for a
privately run prison while others allow for the state to run it. Three state
evaluation teams are privately reviewing the proposals. A recommendation is
expected to reach the governor’s office and the state departments of
corrections and administrative services in October, McGonagle
said. Bruce Berke, a lobbyist with the Sheehan
Phinney Capitol Group that represents Management & Training Corp.,
confirmed the receipt of $24,000 in fees, but referred further questions to
his client. Issa Arnita, director of communications for the Centerville,
Utah-based company, said in an email: “At times we hire lobbyists to educate
various groups on the benefits of public/private partnerships in corrections.
“We are participating in the competitive bid process, and we look forward to
a decision by the state of New Hampshire,” Issa wrote. Berke’s
firm on its website says its lobbyists “utilize their knowledge of the
legislative and regulatory process and their long-term, trusted relationships
with decision makers to achieve their clients’ goals.” Management &
Training Corp.’s proposal included building a prison on Hackett Hill in
Manchester. A third firm, The GEO Group of Boca Raton, Fla., paid at least
$10,000 to Dennehy & Bouley. Lobbyist Jim Bouley couldn’t be reached for
comment, but GEO Group spokesman Pablo Paez said in
an email: “Since the procurement in New Hampshire is ongoing, it wouldn’t be
appropriate for us to comment on our proposal or the process. “Our company
participates in the political process in states across the country, including
New Hampshire, . . . as do a variety of organizations, including private
corporations and organized labor organizations, through lobbyist
representation and contributions to political candidates and parties who
support different public policy viewpoints.” One company, NH Hunt Justice
Group, has not hired any lobbyists. “We don’t see a need to lobby,” said
Buddy Johns, president of CGL, an affiliate of the Hunt Companies, a Texas
construction firm. Hunt Companies and LaSalle Corrections, a prison operator
also based in Texas, have formed the NH Hunt Justice Group, which lists its
home office in El Paso, Texas. He said the procurement process appeared
straight forward. “Some people use outside services to make their point,”
Johns said in a phone interview from Mexico. “I think we believe we’re the
experts in what we do, and we’re best to make that point.” Johns has said his
company proposed building a new prison next to the existing men’s prison in
Concord. LaSalle Corrections, based in Texas, would manage the prison if the
state didn’t. CCA, which declined to discuss its specific lobbying efforts in
New Hampshire, met earlier this year with Lancaster community leaders to let
them know they were one of at least three communities being considered to
host a possible prison costing $100 million to $120 million. Northumberland
and Hinsdale were the others, according to Lancaster’s town manager. McGonagle said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if the
Legislature forms a committee to study the state prisons. If the governor and
Executive Council approved a contract, the Legislature would need to weigh in
on the financial implication on the state budget, he said. Wendelboe said lobbying money in general could be spent
on research, campaign donations or hosting events for legislators. McGonagle said he has talked with lobbyists about general
issues.
June 23, 2012 Concord
Monitor
While political attention is focused on the end of a contentious legislative
session and the beginning of a busy election season, a momentous decision is
being considered behind closed doors in the Department of Administrative
Services. There, Administrative Services and Department of Corrections staff
are reviewing piles of documents from four corporations interested in taking
over the state's prison system and running it for profit. If a contract with
one of the private firms emerges in late summer or early fall, only then will
policy-makers and citizens get to know the details of a deal with profound
implications for public safety, the state budget, job quality and the
constitutional obligation to support the rehabilitation of offenders. The
private prison experiment in other states has gone poorly. For example, a
detailed report released by the American Friends Service Committee in February
on Arizona's experience revealed "widespread and persistent problems in
private facilities around safety, lack of accountability, and cost."
AFSC reviewed state data showing that private prisons under contract with the
state cost more than equivalent units operated by the state Department of
Corrections, and that all private prisons for which security assessment data
was available had serious security flaws. "While no prison can be
entirely safe or problem-free, private prisons demonstrate clear, long-standing
patterns of prisoner unrest including riots, staffing and management issues,
escapes, and other serious safety problems," said Caroline Isaacs, the
report's author. All three of the private firms running prisons in Arizona
have submitted bids for the opportunity to do the same here. One firm, MTC,
operated the private prison in Kingman, Ariz., from which three people
escaped last summer, kidnapping and murdering two campers and burning their
bodies in their trailer. A review showed that tower lights were burned out,
the perimeter was unwatched, and the alarm sounded so many false alarms
nobody listened to it. Elaine Rizzo, a professor of criminal justice at Saint
Anselm College, reviewed the record of prison privatization for the Citizens
Advisory Board of the New Hampshire State Prison for Women. Her paper,
co-authored with Margaret Hayes of Regis College and released at the end of
January, reviewed issues of cost, public safety, and correctional policy and
reached a stark conclusion: "Of greatest concern is the indisputable
fact that private prisons exist to make a profit. It is in their economic
interests to reduce costs by maintaining full facilities, reducing staff
wages and benefits, reducing institutional expenses associated with safety and
sanitation, and reducing critical care services and programming. These
cost-saving measures come at the expense of institutional and public safety,
and hold the potential for negative publicity and more costly lawsuits."
Official financial documents from the private prison companies openly
acknowledge that their business model depends on high rates of incarceration
at a time when policy makers are looking for ways to lower costs and reduce
recidivism. Despite growing evidence of problems in other states - riots,
escapes, high levels of staff turnover - the prison companies are serious
about moving into New Hampshire. The Corrections Corp. of America, the
industry leader, has approached local officials in Lancaster and Hinsdale
about real estate it thinks would be suitable for a large, new prison.
Management and Training Corp., another bidder in the state process, has
expressed interest in property on Hackett Hill Road in Manchester. The GEO
Group and LaSalle/Hunt, the other two bidders, may be scouting for real
estate as well. CCA, GEO and MTC have hired local lobbyists to represent
their interests. Oddly, a decision to award a lucrative contract to a private
prison operator could be made by the governor and Executive Council without
any legislation directing them to do so and without much public discussion of
whether privatization is in the state's interest. That should not be allowed
to happen. The public deserves a full and open airing of the privatization
issue, not a rush job slipped through the Executive Council while the eyes of
voters and lawmakers are focused on other matters. (Arnie Alpert is New
Hampshire program coordinator for the American Friends Service Committee, a
Quaker organization devoted to social justice and peace.)
May 12, 2011 NHPR
The Department of Corrections is warning a plan to privatize part of its
operations won’t save the state money. NHPR’s Dan Gorenstein
reports Commissioner Bill Wrenn told the Senate Finance Committee the move
would actually cost the state. Finance Chair Chuck Morse has suggested one
way the Department of Corrections could save over $10 million dollars next
year is to send up to 600 inmates to private prisons. Morse estimates the
state saves $1 million dollars for every 100 inmates it sends away. But DOC
Commissioner Bill Wrenn says that math is all wrong. “You might save a little
bit. But then you have to pay for the outsourcing, which is more than you are
going to save. No one has poked holes in our numbers yet. No one has said to
me, ‘Commissioner, your numbers are out of whack.’” In March, the House
reduced the Correction’s budget by nearly $10 million dollars. Wrenn
responded, saying to make that kind of cut he would be forced to close the
Berlin Prison.
October 29, 2004 Concord
Monitor
Gov. Craig Benson has said he is still considering shipping some inmates out
of state to private prisons. But state officials who reviewed the proposals
said they told Benson months ago the plan won't save the money predicted.
Instead of the $19 million annual savings that Benson's efficiency committee
projected, the state could save, at best, $300,000 a year, according to two
people who reviewed the bids.
"We made our evaluation, and we sent it to the governor's office with
our recommendation some months ago," said Rep. David Welch, a Kingston
Republican who helped study proposals from two private prisons. "We just
didn't see any significant cost savings. It's now up to the governor to act
one way or another." And at staff meeting last month, Stephen Curry,
corrections commissioner, told employees that the bids were still being
evaluated, according to minutes of the meeting. When an employee confronted
Curry with reports that the committee had concluded its study and had found
no savings in the proposals, Curry said the matter was confidential.
June 10, 2004
A Merrimack Superior Court judge has set a date for a hearing in a state
prison inmate's suit against Gov. Craig Benson over a plan to ship up to
1,000 medium security inmates out of state. Two weeks ago, Judge
Kathleen McGuire scheduled Nov. 22 as the day when inmate David Michaud can
present his case. The governor has proposed to send prisoners out of
state as a cost saving measure. In February, the governor's office sent
out a request for proposal (RFP), asking companies to bid on the right to
study the feasibility of moving up to 1,000 medium security prisoners out of
state. In March, the proposals were due, but only one company had bid
by the deadline. The governor's office re-bid the proposal. So far, Benson
has not taken steps to further the plan. During an open court hearing in
April, Michaud argued the proposal by the governor is causing
"anxiety" and "uncertainty" at New Hampshire State
Prison. Also, Michaud claimed the governor's office will automatically
give the contract to Corrections Corporation or America, the only company to
previously bid on the proposal. Corrections Corporation of America (CCA),
participated in the governor's efficiency commission findings which
recommended privatizing prison operations. Michaud said this allowed
the company to have vital information months before any other bidder. Concord
attorney Andrew Serell, who represented CCA in
Merrimack County Superior Court, said Michaud's claims were unfounded.
Last week, Benson nominated Brig. Gen. Stephen Curry to become the new
Corrections Commissioner. Executive councilors Ruth Griffin,
R-Portsmouth, Ray Burton, R-Bath and Peter Spaulding, R-Hopkinton, all said
they do not support the transfer
and hoped, if confirmed by the council, Curry would not move forward with the
proposal. (N.H. statehouse)
March 13, 2004
After
receiving only one bid, the state will rebid its proposal to send up to 1,000
prison inmates out of state, a spokesman for Gov. Craig Benson said
Friday. "We
want to gather more information," said Wendell Packard. Packard said the new
request for proposals probably will be issued next week. The State Employees
Association, which represents corrections employees, renewed its criticism of
the effort Friday. The union complained that the only
bidder to date -- Corrections Corporation of
America -- has a conflict of interest because it participated in a
state Efficiency Commission that recommended privatizing prison
operations. (Boston.com)
December 15, 2003
If New Hampshire turned its entire prison system over to a private company,
it would be the first state in the nation to do so. While private prisons
provide space for 94,000 inmates across the country, no state has privatized
all of its prisons. In fact, less than 7 percent of inmates nationwide are in
private facilities. The company cited by the government efficiency
commission, Corrections Corporation of America, runs 59 jails and prisons
with space for 59,000 inmates in 20 states. New Hampshire has four prisons
with 2,500 inmates. According to the report, the commission wants the
state to consider sending prisoners to private prisons in other states,
building private prisons here and having a private company take over the
existing prisons. How much New Hampshire would save is unclear. The
report released yesterday says that a private company could save the state
$11 per an inmate per day, with a total savings of $10 million a year.
But that figure is based on the cost of housing inmates at prisons out of
state, according to John Babiarz, a member of the
commission. It does not include the cost of transporting them.
Corrections Corporation of American, which the governor's office has asked to
put together a proposal, said that it gave the commission the $57 a day
figure as a ballpark estimate for the cost of housing inmates out of state,
according to Steve Owen, a company spokesman. The company has not calculated
how much it would charge to run the New Hampshire's prison system or if it
would want to, Owen said. The Nashville-based company does not run any
prisons in the Northeast. Whether private prisons have an economic
advantage over public ones is unclear, according to Dan Mears, a researcher
at the Urban Institute in Washington, D.C., a group that studies criminal
justice issues. Few unbiased studies exist, he said. The ones that do show
minimal savings for privately run prisons. And in some instances, the
savings don't pay for themselves. States should look at hidden costs, like an
inmate's ability to find a job and housing when he or she is released, and
the possibility of lawsuits. "If a private prison ends up hiring
less quality staff than the state would and they end up abusing inmates, a
lawsuit could result," Mears said. And not only is the company
liable, the state is as well, according to Mike Sheehan, a Concord lawyer who
works on prison issues. Critics of private prisons suspect that
companies cut costs by understaffing, poor training for staff and reducing
rehabilitative services like drug and alcohol counseling. "You can
save money, but the question is whether it's a good idea," said Philip Mattera, who helped write a report on Corrections
Corporation of America. According to Owen, Corrections Corporation
saves the most money for its public clients in building new prisons. The
company can complete projects more quickly than government agencies. (C
Monitor)
Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant
Seabrook, New Hampshire
Wackenhut (Group 4)
January 6, 2009 Portsmouth Herald
A nuclear power plant security officer was found guilty Tuesday of
driving drunk and was fined, had his license revoked and was court-ordered to
attend a residential treatment program. Matthew Butterworth, 31, of 31 Barker
St., Methuen, Mass., appeared in Portsmouth District Court Jan. 6 when he
pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of driving while intoxicated. As part
of a plea agreement, the charge was reduced from a second-offense DWI and a
violation-level complaint alleging he drove the wrong way down Congress
Street was dismissed. Represented by public defender Emily McLaughlin,
Butterworth’s plea was his admission to driving drunk on Oct. 26, when
Officer William Dubois saw him motor the wrong way through Market Square. In
exchange for his plea, Judge Sawako Gardner imposed a $1,000 fine, with half
suspended pending his good behavior for one year. The judge also revoked his
license for 12 months and ordered him to attend the state’s residential
seven-day multiple offender treatment program, or an acceptable equivalent.
Following the reinstatement of his license, Butterworth is court-ordered to
have an interlock device installed on any car owned or used by him for a
period of one year. In his financial affidavit for determining eligibility
for a public defender, Butterworth reported he works as a security officer at
Seabrook Station through Wackenhut Security.
May 14, 2008 Seacoast
Online
Three nuclear power plant security officers were the triggermen during
separate accidental shootings during the past nine months, according to
police. The most recent incident involved an off-duty Seabrook Station
security officer who accidentally shot a 9 mm bullet through his hand and
will face criminal charges after making some medical progress, said Seabrook
Police Chief Patrick Manthorn. "He’s going to
need quite a bit of reconstructive surgery," said Manthorn.
"The bullet went through his palm and exited out the back of his hand.
Because of the type of bullet, there was mushrooming, so the hole got bigger
in the back." Manthorn is not naming the power
plant shooter until charges are filed. The Seabrook chief did identify him as
a resident of the Governor Weare Apartment complex,
at 689 Lafayette Road, Seabrook, the same address where another off-duty
nuclear plant officer misfired his gun in a different building during an
unrelated incident. That shooting occurred Jan. 25 when power plant security
trainer Joshua Hill pulled the trigger of his Springfield Armory handgun and
shot a .45 caliber bullet through the floor of his apartment and into the
living space below. Manthorn said Hill, a security
instructor at the nuke plant, was cleaning his gun at the time "and
didn’t realize it was loaded." The most recent shooting was
"contained within the apartment," he said. Hill, 28, of 30 Lower
New Zealand Road, pleaded guilty on Feb. 11 to a related charge of reckless
conduct-placing another person in danger. In exchange for his plea, he was
sentenced to 30 days in the Rockingham County House of Corrections, with all
of it suspended pending his good behavior for one year and a $300 fine. A
third recent and accidental shooting by a power plant officer was reported to
Seabrook police in the fall, Manthorn confirmed
Wednesday. That shooting occurred when the unnamed officer was holstering a
357 SigArms pistol and "a round went off in
the (nuclear plant) armory," said Manthorn. No
charges were filed, said the Seabrook chief. In 2002, another unnamed nuclear
plant security guard was suspended without pay after he accidentally fired
his gun inside a plant security post. Seabrook power plant officers are not
employed by the plant, but by the Wackenhut Corporation, a $3 billion global
security provider with headquarters in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla. In response
to the Herald’s request for comment, Wackenhut spokesman Marc Shapiro said he
was unavailable for an interview, while assuring, "all Wackenhut
employees undergo a rigid employment screening process before hire. Then,
they are thoroughly trained in accordance with (Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
requirements."
April 29, 2008 Seacoast
Online
Police are investigating an accidental shooting in the apartment of a
nuclear power plant security officer, the second accidental discharge by an
off-duty nuclear plant security officer this year. Both shootings occurred at
the Governor Weare Apartment complex at 689
Lafayette Road, said Seabrook Police Chief Patrick Manthorn,
adding they occurred in different buildings during unrelated incidents. Manthorn said the most recent shooting by a Seabrook Station
security officer involved a 9 mm handgun and was "contained within the
apartment." The police chief said details, including the date of the
incident, whether any injuries resulted and the security officer’s identity,
will not be immediately released due to an ongoing investigation. "We
may be charging him criminally," said Manthorn.
On Jan. 25, power plant security trainer Joshua Hill pulled the trigger of
his Springfield Armory handgun and shot a .45 caliber bullet through the
floor of his apartment into the living space below. "He was cleaning his
weapon and didn’t realize it was loaded," said Manthorn.
Hill, 28, of 30 Lower New Zealand Road, pleaded guilty on Feb. 11 to a
related charge of reckless conduct-placing another person in danger. In
exchange for his plea, he was sentenced to 30 days in the Rockingham County
House of Corrections, with all of it suspended pending his good behavior for
one year and a $300 fine. Hill was fined an additional $500, with $250
suspended contingent on the same year of good behavior, said the Seabrook
police chief. Both security officers are employed by Wackenhut, a global
security provider. Seabrook Station spokesman Alan Griffith said he had no
comment on either case, including whether the incidents affected the officers’
employment at the nuclear power provider. Griffith said because the shootings
did not occur on power station property and were "off hours,"
public comment about the men’s private lives is not appropriate. "Safety
is paramount" at the plant, said Griffith, adding "if someone is
involved in a situation" it is investigated fully and there are
consequences when appropriate. In 2002 an unnamed nuclear plant security
guard was suspended without pay after he accidentally fired his gun inside a
plant security post. Griffith described it then as "an accidental
discharge of his sidearm."
Valley Street jail
Manchester, NH
Jun 5, 2019 unionleader.com
220 dinners go uneaten at Valley Street jail as
rumors fly over a bug in the food
MANCHESTER — Inmates at the Valley Street jail refused to leave their cells
to eat dinner Sunday when rumors spread that an insect, which turned out to
be a burned piece of turkey, was found in an inmate’s meal, the jail
superintendent said Monday. The fasting followed two discoveries of worms in
jail food over the last 10 months, since Hillsborough County signed a
contract with a company that specializes in supplying food to correctional
facilities, said Superintendent David Dionne. Dionne said the company —
Trinity Food Services — told him it changed its supplier after he complained
about the second bug. The first was a corn weevil found in frozen corn. The
second was a worm found in a grain product, he said. Dionne said 220 dinners
were prepared at the jail on Sunday. He said inmates wouldn’t leave their
cells to eat them. On Monday morning, they decided to eat. “We sat down and
spoke with them. They understood we’re looking at it,” Dionne said. He said
Valley Street jail has a commercial kitchen, and a piece of turkey was likely
burned when it was being cooked in a big skillet. “I’m thinking that we
burned the food,” he said. He stressed the bugs were not from the jail.
Dionne brought in a technician from the pest company the jail contracts with
and he identified the bug was not native to New Hampshire. Dionne said
Hillsborough County contracted with Trinity about 10 months ago. Previously,
the Department had ordered and purchased the food on its own. Trinity
supplies all the food as well as nutrition and dietitian services, he said. Dionne
said he did not have the dates of the bug discoveries readily available. But
they were not recent, he said. According to its website, the St. Louis-based
TKC Holdings owns Trinity Food Service. The website said Trinity supplies
food to more than 300,000 inmates in more than 40 states and territories. The
company also owns Keefe Group, which supplies food and personal care items to
the corrections industry, and Courtesy Products, which provides coffee
service to hotels and motels. An email to the company seeking comment for this
article was not immediately returned.
|
|
