Bay County Jail, Panama City, Florida
May 27, 2008 News-Herald
Bay County commissioners on Tuesday unanimously rejected an offer by Emerald Correctional Management to drop its lawsuit against the county in exchange for the keys to its jails. The offer was passed on to the board by County Attorney Terrel Arline. "Can we laugh first?" asked Commissioner Mike Thomas. Emerald Correctional Management filed suit against the county in 2006, claiming the bidding process for the construction of the new jail off U.S. 231 was flawed. Arline said he recommended the offer be rejected, but was obligated to inform the commission about what was being put on the table. "Would ‘Hell no' be appropriate?" Commissioner George Gainer said. "I was gonna use those terms," Arline replied, "but I bit my tongue." Although Emerald Correctional was the original low bidder on the project, after some bid clarifications, the job was awarded to the only other responding party, Corrections Corporation of America. The Tennessee-based CCA currently is constructing the new county jail but recently notified the county it would be pulling out of its contract Oct. 1 because of financial concerns. Bay County Sheriff Frank McKeithen is researching how much it would cost his office to take over the facility. He has told commissioners it would be more than what CCA is charging: $46.18 per inmate, per day. Upon completion of the new jail expansion, the rate was expected to drop to about $43. Commissioners approved an agreement Tuesday with Tyndall Air Force Base to house Air Force pre-trial detainees at the current Bay County Jail. Thomas stipulated that any per-inmate costs agreement would need to jibe with future decisions regarding management of the jail once CCA departs.

September 27, 2007 News-Herald
Emerald Correctional Management LLC has taken a step back from the $13.2 million it sought from Bay County — a considerable step. The Louisiana company, which argues it was slighted during the bidding process in 2005 for the county’s jail expansion project, now is seeking $514,050 to settle a lawsuit. Obed Dorceus, attorney for Emerald Correctional, said the reduction doesn’t reflect a loss of resolve. “My client wanted to make sure the county knew he was willing to compromise,” Dorceus said. “But we still believe in the case.” The county has not accepted the settlement offer. Instead, it is requesting Emerald Correctional pay $35,000 in legal fees and drop the case. W.C. Henry, who represents the county, called the original $13.2 million “ridiculous, absurd; you’ve got to be kidding me.” The most recent offer is “still blatantly absurd.” Emerald first brought suit against the county in 2006. The company claimed the county’s bidding process was tainted. Only two companies responded to the call for bids on the project; Emerald’s came in a few million dollars below Tennessee-based CCA. CCA, however, was awarded the job after both companies were asked to clarify their bids. The company had a 20-year history working with the county. The contract Bay County awarded CCA was for six years and more than $36 million, and covers the demolition of the downtown jail, the expansion of the jail annex and management of the completed facility. Ground has been broken on the annex, with an expected completion date of May 2008. Emerald sued the county, alleging it didn’t adhere to bidding rules. Bay County Circuit Judge Glenn Hess dismissed the six-pronged complaint. In May, an appellate court overturned two of Hess’ dismissals. Henry said the entire case has stalled to some degree because Emerald has not filed a new complaint after withdrawing the initial suit and focusing on the two remaining issues. “We’ve kind of been working in limbo,” Henry said. “Right now, there is no complaint. It’s kind of weird; this is very strange.” Dorceus said he plans to file a new complaint soon. Depositions are planned for Oct. 10. Several county employees, as well as Commissioner Mike Thomas, will be deposed via video. Henry said the $35,000 legal fees offer is good until Monday. He said it would spare everyone the costs of a courtroom. “We’re gonna win, and we’re gonna win big in the end,” he said. “If they see the light and realize they’re going to lose, we could save the costs.”

May 2, 2006 WJHG
A lawsuit challenging the awarding of a contract to build and operate a new Bay County Jail has been dismissed. Circuit Judge Glen Hess tossed out the suit filed by Emerald Corrections against the Bay County Commission and Corrections Corporation of America. The dismissal Monday clears the way for the county and CCA to continue planning to build a new county jail adjacent to the jail annex in Bayou George. Emerald had challenged the awarding of the contract for the project to CCA saying it wasn't the lowest and best bidder. It’s the second time Judge Hess dismissed the Emerald Corrections lawsuit.

February 22, 2006 News Herald
Corrections Corporation of America will continue its tenure as Bay County jail operator, although a new contract which the County Commission approved Tuesday allows for a quick, cost-free termination. At its regular meeting in Panama City Hall, the board voted 4-1 to enter into a six-year contract with the Tennessee based CCA, plus a two-year contract for constructing an expansion to the jail annex on Nehi Road and other related projects. Bob Majka, assistant county manager, told commissioners that construction costs dropped from $41.5 million to $39.7 million through “value engineering,” such as using a chain-link fence versus concrete to serve as a yard barricade. Majka and the rest of county staff accepted mostly praise for their work, although two commissioners said staff should have produced an estimate for the Bay County Sheriff’s Office to run the jail. Commissioners George Gainer and Jerry Girvin said they wanted to see what it would cost the county to run the jail, and Gainer had the harshest words for Majka for not having that information. “I’m a little put out with staff because you didn’t do what you said you would do,” said Gainer, who voted against the motion to bestow CCA with the contract. But Majka said there was no instruction from commissioners to get that figure. According to Thomas, Sheriff Frank McKeithen has told him that his department could run the jail but probably not for less money than any private firm could. One resident, Tom Misskerg, told commissioners they “need to take a harder look at jail operations” before awarding a contract. Later, he addressed the board again to ask about potential consequences if another jail construction firm wins its lawsuit against the county over its RFP process. Emerald Correctional Management LLC — the only other firm to bid for the project — has alleged that the county violated state procurement laws and Sunshine Laws when considering proposals. County attorney Mike Burke would not divulge details about the situation, but assured the board: “We wouldn’t have let you go ahead with this contract if we thought there was a problem.”

February 10, 2006 News Herald
Bay County officials on Thursday rejected all of Emerald Correctional Management’s claims in a lawsuit that the bidding process for a jail expansion project was improper and illegal. Meanwhile, the company’s attorney, Obed Dorceus of Tallahassee, said he will ask Judge Glenn Hess to expedite a hearing for a temporary injunction against the county to halt its negotiations with Corrections Corporation of America. “We’re concerned that if the county proceeds with a flawed (selection) process, we may not be able to get some of the remedies we’re asking for,” Dorceus said. The most important objective for Emerald, Dorceus said, is to receive the contract to design and build a Bay County correctional facility. In the lawsuit, Emerald states that the county permitted CCA to modify its proposal after all proposals were opened, violating state law. The county said in a letter to Dorceus that it never asked for a fixed price in the RFP and that “both firms were asked to clarify their proposals to allow the board to conduct due diligence and select a firm with whom to begin negotiations.”

January 14, 2006 News Herald
Emerald Correctional Management LLC has accused the Bay County Commission of breaking state laws in its decision to pursue negotiations with another firm for jail construction projects. The process the County Commission went through in accepting and evaluating the request for proposals, or RFP, was “arbitrary, capricious and illegal,” states Emerald’s petition, filed last week with the county. The county wants a 150,000-square-foot jail addition to the existing jail annex on Nehi Road, creating 680 new beds in addition to the existing 410. The RFP also called for the downtown Bay County Jail to be demolished and for construction of new holding cells connected to the Bay County Courthouse. Shreveport, La.-based Emerald had said it could build the addition for $31.8 million and Tennessee-based Corrections Corporation of America, or CCA, priced it at $38.8 million. The county chose to enter negotiations with CCA. In a formal notice of protest filed Jan. 6, Emerald alleged that Bay County violated Florida procurement laws, Sunshine Laws and the RFP terms. The company requests the county “forward the protest to the Division of Administrative Hearings for a fair determination of the issue at hand.” Emerald further labeled CCA, the company currently operating Bay County’s jails, as “non-qualified, non-responsible and non-responsive.” After taking into account project features that were either missing from the RFP or added but not asked for, the county determined Emerald’s design-and-build cost would be $35.4 million rather than $31.8 million, and CCA’s would be $36.4 million instead of $38.8 million. County staff said that with construction and fixed operational cost for six years, it would cost $117.1 million to stick with Emerald and $114 million with CCA.

December 18, 2005 News Herald
To pair as "jail project contenders" Emerald Correctional Management and Corrections Corporation of America, as did a Nov. 22 News Herald headline, is akin to pairing as boxing-ring "contenders" Pee Wee Herman and Muhammad Ali. CCA manages jail and prison complexes totaling almost 70,000 beds. That's 23 times as many as Emerald's 3,000, and even those are more likely found in less rigid detention centers. But, the two are squared off a in the political arena, not a boxing ring. The prize is a $31 million to $38 million construction job, plus a 10-year contract worth at least $170 million to operate the greatly enlarged county jail. A majority of Bay County commissioners in early December charitably advanced Emerald to a second round this week, on Tuesday. If not Tuesday, then sometime, someone on the County Commission needs to ask, "Who ARE these people?" Emerald's brochure - the one for jail management (the Emerald Companies' emblem appears on numerous other closely held enterprises including homebuilding, real estate and drug testing) - directs attention to its six-man management team. Emerald says it has been doing business out of Shreveport, La., since 1989. In a fashion familiar to anyone who ever puffed a resume, Emerald boasts in its management team "More than 80 years of law enforcement experience," "More than 45 years in principal founder of Emerald Companies," worked "in the correctional and construction industries for more than 20 years." He also heads Emerald Correctional Management, LLC; Emerald P.M. Group, LLC; Emerald Properties, Inc., and The Emerald Group, hardly any of which show up online as identifiable entities. Lee also serves as vice president of W. T. Lee Construction Co., presumably headed by W. T. Lee, who brings "more than 35 years" experience as the management team's business-development man. Glenn P. Hebert, the chief operating officer, worked for 13 years in the Sheriff's Office of Vermillion Parish (pre-Katrina pop. 50,000). Before that, he worked in retail. Emerald's chief of security, Raywood LeMaire "brings more than 35 years of law enforcement experience" including a memorable 20 years as Vermillion Parish sheriff. "It was legend that if you crossed the Sheriff, you were fed to the crabs at Raywood's cabin in Freshwater Bayou," a former resident once said. LeMaire was sheriff in 1990 when a crazy man shackled in an isolation cell plucked out his own eyes. To LeMaire a violent prisoner was a violent prisoner, mental case or not, and treated accordingly. The deputy who discovered the self-mutilation took an hour to decide whether to take the man to a hospital.  Eventually, blind but back on his medication, the man sued LeMaire for negligence and won a jury verdict. LeMaire got the verdict thrown out. LeMaire was still sheriff in 2002 when he was busted by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service special agents. He pleaded guilty to several charges, including shooting over-limit ducks in Freshwater Bayou ponds baited with 500 pounds of rice. He was fined $2,130. The government kept the ducks. LeMaire announced he wouldn't seek reelection in 2004. Clay Lee, identified as CEO and "a correctional management," "More than 30 years in correctional fiscal management," and, "More than 40 years providing correctional training." Most of this cumulative expertise is contributed by four men, all longtime friends or relatives. General Manager Stephan Afeman worked for 17 years in the drug-screening industry. Comptroller M. Shane Carnahan has nine years of experience in the correctional industry. They round out the management team. Whatever "the correctional industry" means with regard to each, they and many others across America are betting it's a growth industry. Until its Bay County foray, Emerald Correctional Management has been a smalltime player that capitalized on hustling even smaller-time players. Like The Music Man, they'd go into small, isolated and impoverished counties and persuade local officials that an economic boom was just a detention center away. Local officials had only to pay to build the facility and pay them to operate it. Emerald's eastward march for new territory leaves behind in Louisiana and Texas some business success but some bad feelings. The most publicized was La Salle County (2000 pop. less than 5,900). County commissioners were persuaded by a lobbyist and the management team to issue $22 million in bonds to build a 500-bed prison. Although commissioners eagerly embraced the idea, they agreed to keep public involvement at arm's length. The secretiveness enabled commissioners and Emerald to reach convivial agreement without the hindrance of county legal and fiscal staff. When the public learned what transpired - that the bonds paid an outrageous 12-percent interest, underwriter fees were 6 percent, Emerald would get a flat amount for operating the prison no matter how small the inmate population, and the persuasive lobbyist reportedly received a percentage of the deal, not a fee - the public was not amused. Lawsuits ensued. It was too late to stop the bond fiasco. As part of the lawsuit settlement, however, Emerald agreed to be paid based on the actual number of prisoners. Emerald also agreed to pay the town of Encinal $50,000 and La Salle County $100,000. Both payments were part of Emerald's bid but somehow were omitted from the contract. When County Commissioner George Gainer talks about Bay County being victimized by bad contracts in the past, this is the kind of shoddy legal work he means. La Salle County had to issue an additional $4.5 million in bonds to pay contractors so the work could proceed. The absence of public input caused additional oversights. Now open, "The facility itself used up all but a few connections-worth of our existing water supply capacity," says Encinal City Council member Barba de Chiva. "It uses - and stinks - all of our sewer capacity. Any further development is now contingent upon our spending millions of dollars to upgrade local infrastructure."

December 16, 2005 News Herald
Emerald Correctional Management LLC says its method for financing jail expansion will help save the county at least $20 million compared to Corrections Corporation of America's payment option. But after meetings with Emerald's staff, at least two County commissioners believe it is better for the county to finance the project itself because the county has a lower bond rating than either company could obtain. "That's not going to be there," Commissioner Mike Thomas said of Emerald's financing plan. "We can save money doing a bond ourselves," he said, indicating that the county's bond rating is around 4.5 percent and if either company funds the project, their bond rating would be 7- to 8-percent. CCA proposes to fund the expansion itself at a projected cost of $334,476 per month for 25 years, totaling around $100 million. With private bond placement, as Emerald suggests, the total debt over 18 years would be around $80 million, or $350,000 per month, said Glenn Hedert, chief operations officer for the Shreveport, La.-based company. In a letter this week to Commission Chairman Mike Nelson, CCA stated that Emerald did not adhere to project specifications in the county's request for proposals, or RFP, and that is why its plan costs less. "If they were compliant with the RFP, their proposal would've cost as much as what we projected," said Jennifer Taylor, senior director of business development for Tennessee-based CCA. Nelson said Thursday he received the 18-page letter at his office, Mike Nelson & Associates, but that he threw it away without reading all of it. "They've already had their say," Nelson said, referring to Emerald's and CCA's presentations to the commission on Dec. 6. "If Emerald sends me anything, it's going to get tossed, too."

Israel
March 4, 2008 Haaretz
The cost of incarceration at the private jail nearing completion in Be'er Sheva will be at least 30% more than in a government facility. The figures are in clear contradiction of the Finance Ministry's position, which stated that operating a private jail would save the government 20% in the cost of prisoner maintenance. The report is according to figures calculated recently by a senior Israel Prison Services official. ALA Management and Operations, a subsidiary of Lev Leviev's Africa Israel, won the government tender to run Israel's first private prison, which is due to open in the coming year beside the existing Be'er Sheva prison. The new prison is still awaiting a ruling from the High Court of Justice. The main argument in the petition is that transferring a prison to a private enterprise infringes on the sovereignty of the state. The state is supposed to have a monopoly on the use of force and punishment, and the petition alleges that a private facility contravenes the Basic Law on Government. The petitioners further claim that privatization could lead to a violation of a prisoner's rights, thus contravening the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty. The tender states that the treasury will pay ALA 220 shekels per day per inmate. But the calculation by the IPS official indicates that, among other things, the per diem cost of the salaries of the 18 wardens provided by IPS will increase inmate maintenance costs by NIS 15 a day. This expense was not taken into account when the tender was signed. It also turns out that the cost of keeping prisoners in an IPS facility has declined since the original tender calculation was made, and now stands at NIS 155 per day - NIS 80 less than the daily cost at the private jail. "The treasury's calculation was not based on a budgetary figure," responded a source at the Finance Ministry, "but was rather made from the tender winner's perspective. Without agreeing to the analysis presented here, it should be noted that the goal is not to save money, but rather to improve conditions for the prison inmates." The state refused to disclose the calculation used in the drafting of the tender, citing commercial confidentiality.

January 1, 2008 Globes
Most of the Israeli public supports the privatization of government companies and public services, including Israel Electric Corporation (IEC), the Israel Airports Authority and the seaports, according to a survey by Maagar Mochot. However, the public rejects the privatization of the Prisons Service, water and sewage infrastructures, and the education and health services. The survey was conducted ahead of today's debate sponsored by the Israel Democracy Institute on private prisons. The survey found a clear correlation between people's level of income and support for privatization. 70% of high income-earners support privatization of IEC the Airports Authority, and the seaports, compared with 46-47% of persons earning less than the average national salary.

July 7, 2007 Haaretz
The Knesset will ask the High Court of Justice today to postpone by a year its deliberations on a petition that seeks to annul a law allowing private companies to operate prisons in Israel. The Knesset will seek to convince a panel of nine justices that it intends to hold a public discussion on the overall implications - economic, social and administrative - of the general processes of privatization in the country. A petition was filed by the Ramat Gan Law School, which argued that the license given to the billionaire Lev Leviev to build and operate a private prison contravenes the Basic Law on Government. The petitioners say the licensing gives a private firm clear powers of governance, including the use of force and the denial of liberty. Leviev's prison is being constructed near Be'er Sheva and is expected to receive inmates in June 2009. A year ago the Knesset asked to participate as a respondent to the petition, and asked to postpone the deliberations - which were scheduled to take place in late August 2006. The justices accepted the Knesset's argument that two bills against privatizing prisons, by MK Shelly Yachimovich (Labor) and Dov Hanin (Hadash), were pending and it was necessary to allow the legislators to deliberate and then vote. In late February, the state and the Knesset asked the court for yet another delay, arguing that although the two bills were rejected in votes, another bill was still pending. The situation was complicated by the fact that MK Nadia Hilu and MK Michael Melchior, who had propsed the bill, withdrew after the two previous bills were voted down. In mid-March, Knesset Speaker Dalia Itzik called on the general public to present the Knesset with position papers on the implications of privatizing prisons, which would be discussed during the summer session. But the explanation filed by the Knesset legal counselor, Nurit Elstein, to the High Court last week said that a discussion of dozens of position papers sent to the Knesset has not been possible due to the legislature's busy agenda in recent months. Elstein said the Knesset plans to hold a series of discussions during its winter session that are expected to be concluded by March 2008. "The Knesset request is not an innocent one," says attorney Gilad Barnea, representing the petitioners. "Its purpose is to bring the court in direct confrontation with the Knesset over the right to legislate laws." Yachimovich added: "Each day that goes by bolsters Lev Leviev's hold on the prison he owns and creates an irreversible situation in which the power to jail, punish, supervise and rehabilitate are in the hands of tycoons."

August 31, 2006 Globes
The High Court of Justice today postponed a hearing on a petition filed by the Academic College of Law, Ramat Gan against the government and Knesset to void a law amending the prison ordinance to allow the establishment of a privately-run prison. A seven-judge panel headed by Supreme Court President Judge Aharon Barak ruled that in six months the government and Knesset will file supplementary statements for the petition. The High Court of Justice said its decision has no bearing on the content of the petition, “which raises serious legal problems.” The decision was given following a discussion on whether there was room, as the state and Knesset argue, for allowing public debate to be completed, and for the Knesset to discuss the issue, before the High Court of Justice hearing and ruling on the case.

July 16, 2006 Globes
A panel of nine High Court of Justice judges has rejected a petition by the Academic College of Law, Ramat Gan and former Israel Prisons Commissioner Shlomo Twiser for an injunction against the minister of finance and public security to continue procedures for the construction of a private prison near Beersheva by ALA Management and Operations Ltd. The High Court of Justice ruled that there were no grounds for an injunction, and that a decision on the petition would be given before the procedures for building the prison were completed, and before sovereign authority was transferred to a private entity. The court therefore ruled that no harm would be caused to the petitioners during the interim.

June 18, 2006 Jerusalem Post
An extended panel of seven High Court justices is due on Sunday to hear a petition by the Ramat Gan Academic College for Law against legislation passed two years ago allowing for the construction and operation of a privately owned prison. Since the law was passed, the Prison Service awarded the franchise for the first such prison to businessman Lev Levayev. Levayev signed a 25-year contract with the state to build and run a prison to house 800 inmates. The petition, filed by attorneys Gilad Barnea and Aviv Wasserman, head of the human rights division of Ramat Gan College, charged that the law violated Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law: Government according to which "the government is the executive authority of the State." According to their argument, while the government may delegate some of its executive responsibilities to private agents, there are certain "core" responsibilities which it must execute itself. Otherwise, it loses its sovereign power. These responsibilities include enforcement of the law, including the incarceration of lawbreakers. "Not only is corrections one of the government's most basic responsibilities, it is probably the most sobering," they wrote, quoting from an article written by Prof. Joseph Field. "The ability to deprive citizens of their freedom, force them to live behind bars and totally regulate their lives is unlike any other power the government has. The responsibility for corrections goes beyond issues of cost efficiency and touches on whether a private company should be able to regulate the affairs of a citizen deprived of his freedom." The petitioners pointed out that the law granted the head of the privately owned prison widespread powers, including handcuffing prisoners in public places, holding prisoners in isolation, search and confiscation, prohibiting a prisoner from seeing his lawyer, control over the prisoner's incoming and outgoing mail, disciplinary hearings, and the right to use firearms when necessary. In its response, the state rejected the petitioners' allegation that the law released the state from its responsibility and maintained that it also gave it far-reaching supervisory powers. These powers included the obligation to appoint a team of Prison Service officials which was to be physically present in the prison 24 hours a day to oversee that the owners fulfilled their duties. The state also rejected the constitutional argument raised by the petitioners to the effect that the law prevented the government from fulfilling its constitutional responsibility as the executive authority of the state. It argued that according to Paragraph 33 (e) of the Basic Law: Government, the government could delegate powers if a law specifically said it could. The intellectual monthly, Eretz Aheret, devoted its latest issue to the controversy over the establishment of a private prison in the hopes of fanning a public discussion which, it alleged, had been almost totally lacking over an issue it described as crucial. "This edition deals with a range of journalistic and philosophical questions regarding the legislation to establish a private prison," wrote the editor, Bambi Sheleg. "Who pushed the project and why; why was such an important law passed in only three months from the day it was brought before the Knesset Interior Committee; why weren't the committee's deliberations covered by the media; why did many MKs vote for a law without understanding its implications; why did the state refuse to publish the terms of the public tender... "On June 18, the High Court... will determine a fateful question. Has the state crossed permissible boundaries in passing a law allowing a private prison? Did the Knesset not exceed its powers and cause irreversible damage to Israeli sovereignty?"

June 18, 2006 Globes
The High Court of Justice today issued a show cause order instructing the state to justify the legality of a private jail within 30 days. The High Court of Justice issued the order following a petition to the court to void a law allowing the construction of Israel’s first private jail near Beersheva. A nine-judge panel will hear the case shortly after the government files its response to the show cause order. The respondents in the petition are the ministers of justice and finance. The High Court of Justice also ordered the parties to file their comments on the petitioners’ request for an injunction to halt further action on the tender for the private jail. The state must submit its response within seven days, and the petitioners will then have seven days to respond. The High Court of Justice will probably rule on whether to allow the tender to go forward within two weeks. The High Court of Justice also ordered a review of whether to bring in the Knesset to the discussion, and whether to add the winner in the prison tender as another respondent to the petition. ALA Management and Operations Ltd., a joint subsidiary of Africa-Israel Investments Ltd. (TASE:AFIL; Pink Sheets:AFIVY) and Minrav Holdings Ltd. (TASE: MNRV) subsidiary Minrav Engineering & Construction (1983) Ltd. won the tender to build and operate the private jail. Under the tender, the jail will become operational in three years. The company must allocate 5.2 sq.m. per convict, and the state will pay the company $49 per convict per day. Academic College of Law, Ramat Gan and former Israel Prisons Commissioner Shlomo Twiser filed the petition. They claim that privatizing prisons transfers the state’s sovereign authority to a private entity, operating out of the profit motive, which is liable to harm the convicts’ rights. The petitioners’ fundamental claim is that the law permitting the privatization of prisons contravenes the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty; and Basic Law: The Government, which bans the transfer of sovereign authority (law enforcement) to a private entity.

April 30, 2006 Globes
Construction of Israel’s first privately operated prison is expected to overcome its final obstacle is a few days. Africa-Israel Investments Ltd. (TASE:AFIL; Pink Sheets:AFIVY) and Minrav Holdings Ltd. (TASE: MNRV), which won the tender for the prison in November 2005, will have to wait until the High Court of Justice hears an appeal against the prison filed by Ramat Gan College Human Rights Department. If the High Court of Justice approves the private prison, Africa-Israel chairman Lev Leviev and Minrav chairman Avraham Kuznitzky will become the first individuals in Israel to operate a private prison in the country. Under the terms of the tender, Africa-Israel and Minrav will build the prison and operate it for 25 years, under the PFI (private finance initiative) method. The state will pay the two companies for each prisoner during the franchise period. The contract will be worth at least NIS 1.5 billion, while the cost of building the prison is estimated at NIS 250 million. Africa-Israel and Minrav are expected to make an annual return on investment of 6-10%. Construction of the prison is scheduled to begin early this year, and end within three years. Located south of Beersheva, the prison will house 800-1,000 low and medium-security prisoners. Since this is the first tender of its kind in Israel, implementation will be monitored, and, if successful, the government might privatize another prison in northern Israel. The Ramat Gan College Human Rights Department argues that privatizing prisons grants the franchisee clear governing authority, including the use of force, including lethal force; restricting freedom, including the use of solitary confinement; and restricting the privacy of both prisoners and visitors. These authorities are the nucleus of the modern state’s sovereignty and authority, and conceding them contravenes Israel’s Basic Laws, which ban the transfer of prisoners from the state’s authority to a private entity driven by the profit motive. The petitioners add that privatizing prisons constitutes a fundamental breach in the legal barriers that prevent harm to a democratic state’s sovereignty, a process that will begin with the privatizing of prisons, but end with the privatizing of the police, judiciary, and armed forces, thereby dealing a death blow to Israel’s constitutional structure. The State Prosecutor’s Office argues that the privatization of a prison is a statutory privatization that does not harm fundamental constitutional rights.

March 1, 2006 Haaretz
The concept of transferring the establishment and management of prisons to a private entrepreneur has arrived in Israel too. There is a bill on this issue, and a first corporation, owned by real estate mogul Lev Leviev and others, is already making an offer to the government to build a prison and run it for 25 years - a deal worth NIS 1.5 billion. The Finance Ministry, which is fanatically insistent on privatizing everything that moves, is supportive, and the initiative is making strides in the Internal Security Ministry as well. The employees of the Israel Prison Service that will be harmed by the privatization are the low-level workers - who constitute the majority of the employees - as those who win the concession will prefer cheap and temporary workers. But the ones who will express the prison service's position in talks dealing with the questions of whether, how much, and how to privatize will not be the low-level workers, but the senior leadership. These are the same people who expect to be integrated into the new owners' business in fat administrative and consulting positions, free of government salary ceilings, or else are planning to bid on future tenders with their own companies. The first signs are already in the air: Orit Adato, the former prison service commissioner, has been recruited as a professional consultant to Leviev's incarceration corporation. Within the prison service, quite a few senior officials support privatization, led by the head of the prison service headquarters. However, privatizing imprisonment raises issues that are still more fundamental than the conflict-of-interest problems of senior prison service officials meddling in the privatization or the unstable future of the low-level workers. Some of these fundamental issues appear in two petitions that have been filed with the High Court of Justice recently against the privatization of incarceration. One of the petitions was filed by the human rights department of the Academic College of Law in Ramat Gan, and the second by Physicians for Human Rights. The basic question the petitions raise is what the "core powers" of the state are, which fundamentally cannot be transferred to subcontractors. There is universal agreement about the existence of such powers. The problem is that no nation has precisely defined what those powers include - that is, what the limits of privatization are. And in every country in which the subject of core powers has come up for fundamental judicial debate - of the kind that is to be conducted shortly in the High Court - the judges have preferred not to make a decision on the matter and to wait for the legislators. Privatization is a process in which the state, which holds assets, resources and powers as a trustee of the citizens, sells them into private hands. In cases such as private education or private medicine, those who want to pay money for them do so if they can afford it, and quality control is by means of demand: When the service fails, the client votes with his feet, goes back to using the government service or chooses another provider. Prisons, however, are run differently. The prisoners are literally a captive clientele that might get the service, but doesn't want it and certainly doesn't purchase or fund it. The true client is the public at large, and the service it is requesting is not the provision of shelter, food and clothing for criminals, but the distancing of dangerous elements, punishment, education and rehabilitation. In contrast to other arenas of privatization, the chain reaction of the clients when it comes to incarceration - that is, the public - will be tangled, fragmented and weakened. Who exactly will respond if it becomes clear that the prisons are being run badly, that there is corruption, that the prisoners have a low level of personal safety, or that the ability to keep them behind bars is hampered by a constant attempt to minimize costs (such as by cutting down on the number of wardens) and increase profit? When the entity financing a service and the entity consuming it are different, who will the professionals - such as those in the Internal Security Ministry, which is to supervise the entrepreneurs - represent? These questions become sharper still in light of the tremendous range of new potential ties between money and power that are being offered by the privatization of incarceration. Israeli law-enforcement officials have shown in the last few years that they are increasingly ready to follow in the footsteps of countries, such as Denmark, that have cut down on imprisonment in cases such as financial crimes, replacing it with deterrent fines and other punitive methods that have been shown to be effective. How will a real estate mogul who runs prisons use his connections with lawmakers when the Knesset debates bills geared toward cutting down on the number of prisoners, a la Denmark, or other bills dealing with shortening or lengthening prison terms? It may be that in the absence of explicit legislation, the High Court justices will choose to refrain from defining the state's core powers and the limits of privatization. But even without being required to give such a binding definition, the High Court is likely to contribute by determining that it is appropriate and reasonable always to include corporeal restraints, primarily detention and imprisonment, within the state's core powers. Such a ruling, and the implied order that it is appropriate only for civil servants to be responsible for all powers of corporeal restraint, will take the privatization of prisons off the agenda, thereby granting suitable protection of the public interest, the rights of the Israel Prison Service workers and the human dignity of the prisoners.

November 28, 2005 Haaretz.com
Ostensibly, the idea behind the process of privatization, in which it was recently decided that a group of companies headed by tycoon Lev Leviev will build and operate a private prison, is no different from the idea behind the processes that during the past decade have led to privatization in the Employment Service, the seaports and the national airline. But this is different. The sovereignty of the state, as experts on political science and political philosophy say, is expressed in its monopoly on applying means of force on everyone who is within its boundaries. The army, the police, the State Prosecutor's Office, the courts and the prisons are tools by means of which the state exercises its authority and implements its sovereignty. Thus the state of Israel has decided to delegate some of its authority to Leviev in building a prison near Be'er Sheva. This happened in a process that went on for about five years and provoked public debate. The idea was imported from abroad by Finance Ministry officials during Ehud Barak's tenure as prime minister and was frozen because of the opposition of then-public security minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, revived when (now Likud MK) Uzi Landau replaced him and gained momentum in 2003 when (now Likud MK) Benjamin Netanyahu, who was appointed finance minister at that time, started to promote it very energetically. About two weeks ago an inter-ministerial tenders committee consisting of representatives of the Finance Ministry, the Public Security Ministry and the Prison Service chose the bidder who will build and operate, for 22 years, a prison for 800 inmates. In the winning company, which will receive a state grant of NIS 47 million to build a prison with an investment of NIS 250 million, the controlling share is in the hands of Lev Leviev, and the partners in it will be the Israeli Minrav Engineering Company and the American Emerald Company, which operates small private prisons in the United States. When the prison begins to operate, the State of Israel will pay the company for every prisoner incarcerated. The overall extent of the contract is estimated at about NIS 1.4 billion. When the idea was first brought up, at the Prisons Service they argued that it was incumbent upon the state to solve the prison space shortage by building additional public prisons. Only during the past three years, after Lieutenant General Prison Commissioner Yaakov Ganot replaced Orit Adato - and realized how determined the Finance Ministry was to advance the project - did the service decide to support the privatization and even made itself a leading force in its implementation. Prisons Service Commander Haim Glick, headquarters chief of the Prison Service and the person who is considered one of the leading candidates to replace Ganot in about a year, is more identified than anyone else now with the idea of establishing the private prison. Glick, who is both an economist and a lawyer, played a key role in preparing the tender, in establishing the professional requirements that are included in it and also in the selection of the winning bidder. Prisons Service Commissioner (ret.) Adato, upon her retirement from the service, founded Adato Consulting, Ltd., which is providing professional advice to the prison managements, both public and private, internationally. Adato is also the professional consultant to the group that won the franchise to operate the prison in Israel. More prisoners than China During the 12 years that have elapsed since the establishment of the world's first private prison in the United States, a great deal of experience has accumulated, which mostly is not encouraging. About 30 countries have thus far established approximately 200 private prisons, in which more than 150,000 inmates are incarcerated. Most of the private prisons have been established in the United States, France, Britain and Australia, and a few of them in South American states and in Eastern Europe; and there is also one country - New Zealand - that has reversed its decision to privatize prisons. In the U.S., however, private prisons have become a huge industry: About 14 percent of all federal prisoners and about 6 percent of the state prisoners are held in private prisons. The prison industry is already in second place, right after the high-tech industry, in the ranking of growth: The four leading companies, whose profits came to no less than $2.3 billion dollars in 2004, are growing at the rate of 5.9 percent annually. As they grow stronger, so too does their public influence and thus their lobbying efforts with the aim of making criminal legislation and punishment policy more stringent. No wonder then that the number of prisoners in the United States, which a few years before the establishment of the first private prison stood at 280,000, has burgeoned since then to 2.13 million today. This monstrous number is higher than the number of prisoners in China, where the population is four times greater than that of the United States. "Private prisons are not the only reason for this increase, but there is no doubt that their lobbying activity is one of the reasons for the increasing stringency of punishment and the increase in the number of prisoners," says attorney Aviv Wasserman, the head of the human rights division at the Academic College of Law in Ramat Gan, whose petition to the High Court of Justice against the decision to establish a private prison here is still pending. Wasserman believes that here, too, we will see such lobbying campaigns in the future. "Even now there is talk about the need for toughness, but today they are discussing this with the participation of the Justice Ministry, the Israel Bar Association, academia and the human rights organizations," he says. "From now on there will also be participation in these discussions, for example in the Knesset House Committee, of Lev Leviev's representatives, who will want to increase the number of prisoners. This is a new player who has interests that are worth billions of shekels and will come with the best lawyers and public relations people. His weight could prove crucial." A request to interview Leviev has been unanswered but Ronny Rahav, the public relations person for Leviev's Africa-Israel Investments, has sent the following response in writing: "Africa-Israel's vision is to reach a situation in which the work of rehabilitating prisoners will rehabilitate them for the long term, so that they will not return to prison again. We do not see any need to intervene in legislative processes. We trust the state and its laws." There are three models for prison privatization. In the partial privatization model, the entrepreneur builds the prison and provides most of the services there (from equipment and food to medicine, rehabilitation and employment) but leaves its professional management in the hands of the state; the prison guards and officers are subordinate to the state and are employed by it rather than by the entrepreneur. In the full privatization model,in effect mostly in the United States, the entrepreneur is also responsible for the prison's operational management and is even authorized to try and punish the prisoners for disciplinary infractions. All of the members of the staff, including those who are authorized to try the prisoner and extend his term of imprisonment, are employed by the entrepreneur. Israel has decided to adopt a third model, which is implemented mainly in Britain: The entrepreneur manages the prison, as in the American model, but the authority to try and punish prisoners remains in the hands of the Prisons Service. Reducing expenditures "This model should not have been adopted," says Dr. Uri Timor, a lecturer in the criminology department of Bar-Ilan University, who inspects conditions in the Prisons Service facilities on behalf of the Israeli Council for Criminology, an organization of academics. Timor believes that the franchisee must not be allowed to employ the prison guards because studies done in the private prisons elsewhere have shown that the entrepreneurs tend to increase their profits by means of hiring untrained personnel, at low wages and without social benefits. Another way of decreasing expenditures entails cutting to the minimum the period of training for the prison guards. The terrible employment conditions, explains Timor, leads to a high turnover of prison employees and the lack of training results in unprofessional work. The combination of the two phenomena turns the private prisons into facilities with a high rate of violent incidents, in which the prisoners' rights are violated daily. Timor believes that this will happen in Be'er Sheva as well. "The cost of the wages of a prison guard in the Prisons Service, including benefits and pension, comes to NIS 20,000 a month," he explains. "For a private company whose main interest is profit this is a very large sum of money. What will they do? They will take students, train them for a day or two and pay them the minimum wage without social benefits. This has to have a bad effect on their work. And this is a pity, because in the Prisons Service there is very professional and skilled manpower. In the Prisons Service prisons perhaps the walls are crumbling but the management is quiet and serious, with very little violence." "A prison guard is not a shopping mall security guard, and we have no intention of hiring prison guards the way security guards are employed at a mall," responds Orit Adato. The contract that has been signed between the state and the franchisee that she is advising does not stipulate the wages or the method of employment at the prison, but Adato promises that the pay "will be above the minimum wage," and that "an incentive method" will be used that will reduce the turnover of prison guards. "The method of employment will provide incentive for the prison guard to continue to work at the prison," she says. "The longer he works, the better the social benefits he will be given. In the Prisons Service, too, they are no longer granting tenure until pension age and are giving five-year contracts instead." "We are well aware of the negative phenomena of the high rate of prison guard turnover," says Commander Glick, who is slated to supervise the work of the franchisee on behalf of the Prison Service. "As the state cannot dictate the prison guards' pay to the franchisee, we decided to stipulate for the franchisee the maximum rate of prison guard turnover that will be allowed. Every time the turnover is more than what is permitted, we will impose a monetary fine on him." Glick also says that the Prisons Service will determine for the franchisee the length of the training that prison guards will receive ("no less than 250 hours"), and that it will be forbidden to employ prison guards who have not been approved by the Prisons Service. "It could be that the franchisee will want to hire pensioners in order to save expenditures," he says. "It will not be able to do this, because we will not approve pensioners." "For every deviation the franchisee will be fined by us," promises Glick. "If a prisoner is murdered, it will be fined. The same applies if a prison guard is attacked, if there is an escape, if equipment is broken or if there are many complaints about insufficient food." He is convinced that supervision through fines, which has not proven itself against the commercial television franchises, will succeed against the private prison franchisees. And unlike the practice in the broadcast industry the rates for the fines here will be kept secret. "We have to maintain secrecy," he explains, "because if the prisoners know, for example, how much the fine is for breaking a window or many complaints about the food, they will be able to blackmail the management and take control of the whole prison." Dr. Yoav Sapir, the deputy chief public defender at the Justice Ministry, is opposed in principle to private prisons ("I find a strong moral discord in the fact that wealthy tycoons will make more money from people's suffering") and has difficulty believing that the Prisons Service will indeed manage to prevent the negative phenomena that characterize the system in the U.S. "The only way that the franchisee can increase his profits is on the backs of the prisoners and the prison guards," he says on the basis of the American experience. "The franchisee always tries to give the minimum and argues about the interpretation of the requirements of the supervisory body. If the contract requires him to give three meals a day, he will argue about the interpretation of the word `meals.' And if he is required to give each prisoner a soup spoon, he will argue about the size of the spoon. In the U.S. there have been prison guards who were fired because they gave a prisoner an extra spoonful of soup. At nearly every private prison there is a shortage of clothing, the medical service is flawed, mental health services hardly exist, and the rehabilitation programs are minimal." Sapir thinks that much of this will happen here. Adato promises it won't because the franchisee will take care to act according to the contract, which "requires us, for example, to give medical and educational services at a higher level than in the Prisons Service," and Glick says the Prisons Service will thwart every attempt by the franchisee to act in this way. Waiting for the High Court Construction of the private prison, which is scheduled to operate in 2008, will begin in a few months, unless the High Court decides otherwise. A bench headed by Justice Dorit Beinisch, which deliberated on attorney Wasserman's petition about two months ago, issued a show-cause order for the state to explain "the boundary of appropriate privatization." Wasserman argues that prison privatization does away with the state's monopoly on the use of force against citizens. The justices so far refrained from disqualifying his contention. The state's reply is to be given in the middle of December, with the justices expected to rule by the end of the month. If the High Court does not reject privatization outright, the success or failure of the prison will depend on the quality of the Prisons Service supervision. Glick promises that this will be "extremely close" and will be "carried out in real time." However, neither the size of the supervisory team nor its ways of working is yet clear. "What is already clear at this time," says Glick, "is that the supervisors will be working on the prison premises and the franchisee will be obligated to connect all of its computers to the Prisons Service computers. In that way we will know about everything that happens inside the prison." Timor is skeptical. "The Israeli experience in the area of supervising franchisees is not really encouraging," he says. "It suffices to read the state comptroller's reports about the TV franchisees, the gas companies that maintain containers in hazardous conditions, the old age homes and the psychiatric hospitals. I do not have many reasons for believing that the Prison Service will know how to supervise any better than all the other supervisory bodies in the country."

November 16, 2005 IDEX
Israel's best known diamantaire, Lev Leviev, will soon own a private jail. His Africa-Israel real estate firm won a bid to build and operate Israel's first private jail. Leviev and Minrav, another Israeli real estate firm, will build the 200 million NIS ($42.25 million) and operate it for 25 years before turning it over to the state. The state will pay the jail according to the number of prisoners being held at any one time. In a release, the companies said they "consider themselves financial organizations with a social mission." The successful bidders will operate rehabilitation projects, though they might not include diamond polishing. Leviev privately owns the LLD Group, which incorporates all his diamond related enterprises - mining, polishing plants, and various wholesaling and retailing joint ventures. Africa-Israel, a publicly traded company which Leviev controls, owns real estate in Israel and Eastern Europe, a large 7-Eleven franchise, an Israeli toll road, energy projects, fashion companies and several media operations.

November 16, 2005 Globes
Minrav Holdings Ltd. (TASE:MNRV) and Africa-Israel Investments Ltd. (TASE:AFIL; Pink Sheets:AFIVY) will set up Israel's first private prison, announced an inter-ministerial committee responsible for the matter today. Minrav and Africa-Israel beat a consortium comprising Solel Boneh Building and Infrastructure, Dankner Investments, and GEPSA of France. Lev Leviev controls Africa Israel, and Abraham Kuznitsky is chairman and CEO of Minrav. Minrav and Africa-Israel will build the prison and operate it for 25 years, during which period the state will pay an annual sum for each prisoner, under the private finance initiative (PFI) method. The contract is worth NIS 1.4 billion, including NIS 250 million in construction costs. Minrav and Africa-Israel will be paid NIS 64 million a year, amounting to NIS 1.6 billion over the period of the contract. They will also receive a NIS 47 million set-up grant, to be paid when construction of the prison is completed and the state authorizes its operation. Minrav and Africa-Israel are expected to get an annual return of 6-10% on the investment. Construction of the prison is scheduled to begin in early 2006, and to be completed within three years. Located south of Beersheva, the prison will house 800-1,000 low to medium-risk inmates.

LaSalle County Jail, La Salle, Texas
September 27, 2003
A lawsuit set for trial today over the La Salle County Commissioners' handling of public access to information about a controversial jail project has been settled after a marathon negotiating session. "The lawsuit was filed because they weren't giving us information about the project," said Donna Lednicky, of Encinal, one of the plaintiffs who attended the 13-hour mediation session that ended late Wednesday. "We sued because they violated the Texas Open Meetings Act, and they have admitted this," she said of one element of the settlement. The suit was filed last year by several residents of Encinal, a small community in southern LaSalle County where the county commissioners unanimously voted to build a 500-bed jail to hold U.S. Marshals Service prisoners. Critics of the $24 million jail project accused the commissioners of holding meetings without giving proper notice, withholding public documents about the project and refusing to answer questions in public forums about it. Originally filed in hope of blocking construction of the jail, the suit was settled short of that goal. The agreement calls for former LaSalle County Judge Jimmy Patterson to be replaced on the Public Facilities Corporation by current County Judge Joel Rodriguez and for all public documents relating to the jail project to be filed with the LaSalle County Clerk. The county also has agreed to post notices of its meetings in Encinal. Before this, Encinal residents had to drive 30 miles to Cotulla to read postings at the county courthouse. In addition, the county agreed to pay the plaintiffs' legal fees and court costs. "It's still a terrible deal, but since the bonds were approved by the attorney general, it's uncontestable. We think we got more in the settlement than going to court," Lednicky said.  (Express-News)

September 20, 2003
The U.S. Marshals Service soon will narrow the list of proposals from South Texas counties wanting to partner with the agency to build a 2,800-bed federal detention facility near Laredo — the largest private prison project in the nation.  Details are sketchy but at least two counties — LaSalle and Webb — are interested in landing the deal for what competitors for the contract have called a "superjail."  Florida-based Wackenhut Corp. has submitted two sites in Webb County, where it says it could build the facility with the county's help.  Another private prison corporation, Emerald Correctional Management of Shreveport, La., wants to expand an already controversial project in Encinal to give the federal agency the number of beds it seeks.  Emerald has an agreement with the LaSalle County Public Facilities Corp. to manage a 500-bed federal detention center in Encinal, population 629. Construction of the center is under way, Sheriff Jerry P. Patterson said.  LaSalle County Judge Joel Rodriguez Jr., who recently was elected and isn't a member of the public facilities corporation, opposes any plans to expand the detention center.  Rodriguez is a vocal critic of the center itself, saying the prior administration issued high-interest bonds to pay for it without public input.  He said the county is in no position to handle more prisoners, considering it's still waiting to hear from the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection on a possible contract to build a separate 1,000-bed facility. Frio County also is being considered for the BCBP project.  "That would increase five times the population of Encinal," Rodriguez said. "The city doesn't have the infrastructure to support a 2,800-bed facility."  Officials with Emerald Correctional Management couldn't be reached for comment Friday.  Encinal resident Sean Chadwell said he doubts the U.S. Marshals Service will seriously consider any proposal from LaSalle County to build the "superjail," because of the turmoil it generated by approving the 500-bed facility.  Chadwell is among a group of Encinal residents who have filed a lawsuit against LaSalle County for improperly approving that $27 million deal. County officials have denied the suit's allegations and a mediation hearing is scheduled for Wednesday in San Antionio.  At one point, the federal agency suspended funding for the project because of complaints that residents weren't being included in the decision-making process.  The money was later reinstated.  "I don't think they really stand a chance," said Webb County Judge Louis Bruni of LaSalle County's effort to net the 2,800-bed facility. "The lack of infrastructure up there would (increase) the cost."  But Bruni said there are other competitors within Webb County that he would need to fend off in order for the county's joint venture with Wackenhut to win.  The U.S. Marshals Service won't identify the entities vying for the contract, or even say how many are competing or where they propose to locate the center.  "Everybody wants a piece of the pie," Bruni said. "It would be a tremendous gain."  The judge estimates 500 new jobs would be created in the county if the facility were to be built there.  But even in Laredo, opposition already has sprouted.  On Thursday, representatives from the Austin-based Texas Criminal Justice Reform Coalition spurred about a dozen students at Texas A&M International University to fight the project.  "Do we want Laredo to seem like a giant holding cell for prisoners?" asked the coalition's Carlos Villareal.  (San Antonio Express-News)

July 21, 2003
Backers of a controversial jail financed with $21.8 million of taxable, high-yield revenue bonds have sued the top official in LaSalle County, Tex., claiming he interfered with a $25 million contract to build the 500-bed facility under construction near the Mexican border and endangered millions of dollars worth of similar projects. The plaintiffs include Dallas-based bond underwriter Municipal Capital Markets Group Inc., Shreveport, La.-based private prison operator Emerald Correctional Management, and the architectural firm Corplan Inc. of Dallas. The lawsuit, filed in LaSalle County District Court on July 14 by San Antonio attorney Troy S. Martin 3d, alleges that county Judge Joel Rodriguez has disrupted plans to build a series of jails near the Mexican border.  The lawsuit alleges that Rodriguez, who is the top county commissioner, made false statements about the deal to reporters. "If Rodriguez is not prevented and restrained from engaging in threatening activities and communications with third persons, there is a substantial likelihood that these entire multimillion dollar projects will fail," the lawsuit states.  In a separate lawsuit, former county Judge Jimmy P. Patterson, who remains head of the LaSalle County Public Facilities Detention Corp. that issued the bonds on Nov. 7, is suing Rodriguez for defamation.  A third lawsuit, filed by a LaSalle County citizens group, accuses the county commissioners of violating the Texas Open Meetings Act by withholding information about the deal.  Under the contracts, Rodriguez said the county stands to lose $373,808 in the first year, $1.2 million in the second, and more than $1.9 million afterward from the new 500-bed Encinal detention facility.  The district attorney for LaSalle County is also leading a search for records on the bond deal, Rodriguez said.  Although a preliminary official statement for the revenue bonds stated that county attorney Elizabeth Martinez had reviewed and approved the contracts, she denied that, saying she was not hired by the authority and did not sign the
deal.  (The Bond Buyer)

May 12, 2003
The honeymoon between new LaSalle County Judge Joel Rodriguez and the four incumbent county commissioners — if ever there was one — has ended with a nasty thud.  Saying he is weary of begging the commissioners for financial information about past county projects and also fearful the county is just weeks from going broke, Rodriguez this week took an extreme step.  "I'm asking the county attorney to file misdemeanor (criminal) complaints on public information violations and bid violations against the commissioners," said Rodriguez, who served two terms as county treasurer before being elected judge.  Rodriguez says he's most worried about contracts the county signed last year with a Louisiana company, Emerald Correctional Management Corp., to operate two facilities.  One is a 48-bed county jail that houses federal prisoners, and the other is a 576-bed detention center that also will house federal detainees. The larger facility will open next spring near Encinal.  Rodriguez claims the contracts, negotiated without the oversight of a lawyer, are bad for the county.  He said the county already is losing thousands each month on the jail because it must house its own prisoners elsewhere. He predicts the situation will get worse when the larger facility opens.  He said the commissioners have ignored his pleas to hire an outside lawyer to review the contracts with an eye toward renegotiating them.  The project, rushed through late last year with a minimum of public input or disclosure, has triggered two lawsuits from residents complaining about the process.  It was financed with high-interest debt issued through the county's nonprofit Public Facilities Corp. The four commissioners, along with former County Judge Jimmy Patterson, are the board members of both the PFC and another nonprofit entity that backed a large county project.  (San Antonio Express-News)

December 12, 2002
A lawsuit filed by a group of citizens in La Salle County, Tex., seeks to halt a controversial private jail near the Mexican border financed with nearly $22 million in high-yield bonds, and accuses county officials of violating the state's open-meetings law in approving the project.  The project, designed to create jobs in the poor, sparsely populated county, has come under siege since the bonds were sold on Nov. 7. The official statement for the taxable bonds cited approval on some legal questions by county attorney Elizabeth Martinez, but Martinez has said she never signed any documents concerning the jail.   County Treasurer Joel Rodriguez, who defeated outgoing county Judge Jimmy P. Patterson and will take office Jan. 1, has vowed to stop the jail. In Texas, the county judge is the top administrative official and leads the commissioners' court.  The suit filed on Monday asks the state district court in Cotulla to halt any commissions and use of bond proceeds, and to also declare the nonprofit issuer of the bonds -- the La Salle County Public Facility Detention Corp. -- "null and void." The corporation was created and is managed by the county commissioners and county judge.  The U.S. Marshals Service, which was expected to be the major customer for the 500-bed jail, last week suspended a $3 million grant for the project pending an investigation and hinted that it could back out of the project.  Although Patterson and others on the commissioners' court claim they have made all documents available in meetings, Rodriguez and others dispute that. Rodriguez said he had to file a freedom of information request to get the documents, even though he serves as the chief investment official of the county.  Attorney H.C. Hall 3d, representing Greg Springer of Encinal, last month wrote a letter to Judge Martinez seeking an investigation of the commissioners and claiming business involving the jail was conducted in private.  "My client, as well as other landowners in La Salle County, believe that all required public notices and requirements incident to the project have been ignored and/or purposefully avoided," Hall wrote. "It is apparent that the entire transaction has been purposefully conducted behind closed doors."   (The Bond Buyer)

December 5, 2002
The U.S. Marshals have thrown a wrench into construction plans for the proposed $25 million Encinal detention facility. On Nov. 22, the Marshals issued La Salle County Judge Jimmy Patterson a letter stating that the $3 million federal Cooperative Agreement Program grant, which was awarded July 29, would be suspended until certain demands are met. At 6:45 p.m., the judge and four commissioners will convene as the La Salle County Public Facility Detention Corporation. They formed this private nonprofit corporation for financing purposes of the $25 million, 500-bed facility, which they want to use as an economic development tool. However, due to a public outcry by Encinal ranchers and businessmen, the incoming La Salle County Judge (Joel Rodriguez, who is the county treasurer) and incoming treasurer (Marisa Mancha, an Encinal council member), the Marshals put the CAP grant on hold. "The U.S. Marshals Service has received numerous telephone calls and written correspondence concerning the feasibility of La Salle County undertaking such a project," the Nov. 22 letter reads. "Also, we have learned that now there is a corporation involved with this project that has an action filed against them by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development," it states. In 1999, La Salle County officials formed a similar nonprofit corporation (La Salle County Housing Finance Corporation), but defaulted on nearly $1 million in U.S. Housing and Urban Development-backed home loans. HUD has since issued sanctions against the housing corporation, County Judge Patterson and Commissioners Albert Aguero and Raymond Landrum. The Encinal facility would be managed and run by a private company called Emerald Correctional Management, L.L.C. of Shreveport, La. In early November, the Texas Attorney General's office approved the sale of $22 million in high interest revenue bonds for the project. (Laredo Morning Times)

November 27, 2002
For Jimmy P. Patterson, the recent sale of nearly $22 million in lease revenue bonds to build a privately managed jail is about bringing jobs to a poor Texas county near the Mexico border. The outgoing county judge says the jail will provide badly needed jobs while attracting other businesses to La Salle County. In addition, the county has a deal with the U.S. government to provide funding and prisoners for the lockup. But County Judge-elect Joel Rodriquez Jr. fears the deal could ruin the sparsely populated county. He claims Patterson pushed it through without enough community input and before other LaSalle officials - including the county attorney - could sign off on the bonds, in possible violation of securities regulations. In addition, a spokesman for the U.S. Marshal's Service says it is still evaluating whether the county is actually the proprietor for the jail as would be required for a valid Intergovernmental Agreement like that cited in bond documents for the deal. Emerald Correctional Management of Shreveport, La., would operate the jail, which is tentatively scheduled to open in April. Construction has yet to begin, following an official groundbreaking on Sept. 25. In Texas, county judge is the title for the top administrative official, who is not a judge in the legal sense. Patterson, who has served in county government for 24 years and whose brother, Jerry Patterson, is sheriff, says he stands by the jail plan despite the controversy over the project that he admits may have contributed to his defeat by Rodriguez, the county treasurer. But Rodriquez says the county is in no position to engage in high finance, even through a conduit such as the Public Facility Detention Corp. In some years, debt service on the bonds will surpass $2 million, which equals the current operating budget of the county, he says. The official statement says the county will be required to make rental payments sufficient to pay principal, premium and interest on the bonds when due solely from revenues of the jail. But if the U.S. Marshal's office backs out of its deal, where will that leave the county? Rodriguez asks. He says he will try to stop the project as soon as he takes office Jan. 1 and assumes leadership of the PFDC as well. "This is a doomed deal," said Rodriquez. "It's like real estate speculation, basically. Speculators come in and sucker counties like ours and make them think they've struck gold, then the whole thing collapses." Rodriguez, who claims he had to file Freedom of Information Act requests to obtain basic information about the deal despite his role as the county's chief investment officer, says the official statement contains misleading statements. He says the OS contains an opinion by the county attorney on the legality of the bond issue, but the county attorney never provided such an opinion. Attorney Elizabeth Martinez said she knew nothing about the jail project until Nov. 4, three days before the bonds were sold at rates ranging from 10% to 12%. Then, she said, she was given 24 hours to sign an opinion that she considered beyond her expertise. She said she never signed the opinion. "I didn't appreciate the fact of being brought in at the last minute and my name being used without my being informed about it," Martinez said. "I am counsel to the county, but I have never been appointed counsel to the corporation." Some officials say a misstatement involving a county attorney opinion could constitute a violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Act of 1934, Rule 10b-5."A 10b-5 violation involves a misstatement or omission of a material fact," said Martha Haines, director of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Office of Municipal Securities. Patterson said he and Rick Reyes, a former commissioner from neighboring Webb County who recently became an adviser on bond issues, were the first to discuss the idea of building a jail. Reyes is a consultant to the county and stands to make $700,000 for his work based on a percentage of the bond proceeds. (The Bond Buyer)

Lincoln County Detention Center, Carrizozo, New Mexico
June 19, 2008 Ruidoso News
Before Lincoln County commissioners filed over to the county detention center in Carrizozo for a semi-annual tour and lunch, an official with Emerald Correctional Management Inc. briefed them on changes since the company took over May 4. Al Patino, vice president for governmental affairs for Emerald, said security was "first and foremost" among plenty of changes. Emerald took over from Cornell Companies, the firm that absorbed Correctional System Inc., which managed the jail since it opened in April 2001. But complaints about staffing shortages, the filing of several lawsuits and an in-mate disturbance in January created dissatisfaction. Cornell officials in February announced they intended to execute a 90-day notice to terminate the contract with the county that was to run until August 2009. Emerald was the only company to respond to a request for proposals. Patino said they found equipment in disrepair and other items needing maintenance. They also painted. But major changes were tied to security, he said. "We found a lot of procedural issues, such as classification of inmates," Patino said. "We determined why each inmate was there and his previous history to decide on the proper housing." A warden from one of their Texas prisons helped identify problems, he said. For the one juvenile in the jail, they worked with the district attorney, then requested and received in writing a court order from the judge for him to stay until sentenced. Commission Chairman Tom Battin asked if the company expected to detain juveniles on a regular basis and Patino said no, this 16-year-old is being sentenced as an adult and is a special case. Patino thanked County Manager Tom Stewart, who was instrumental in allowing the company to address issues immediately, he said.

April 17, 2008 Ruidoso News
A one year contract with four renewal options was approved Tuesday by Lincoln County commissioners with a new firm to manage the county detention center in Carrizozo. Emerald Correctional Management LLC, founded in 1996 with headquarters in Louisiana, was represented by Al Patiño, director of special projects, and Clay Lee, chief executive officer. They were in the county seat of Carrizozo Monday beginning the transition of detention center employees from Cornell Industries to Emerald. In February, Cornell officials notified the county they intended to terminate the company's contract with the county "for convenience," with an effective date of May 4. The contract was to run through August 2009. The county took aggressive action for the procurement of a new operator and consideration of careful planning for an orderly transition, said County Manager Tom Stewart. Emerald was the only responsive submission to a request for proposals advertised by the county with a March 28 deadline for submission. After a closed executive session during a special commission meeting Friday to consider the proposal from Emerald officials, commissioners awarded the RFP to the company, subject to negotiation of a successful contract. Following the recommendation of Stewart, and with a few minor changes proposed by County Attorney Alan Morel from the initial submission, the contract was approved Tuesday in a unanimous vote by commissioners. "The firm has begun steps to transition current employees to the new company to meet the May 4 deadline for assuming operations," Stewart told commissioners. Hitting the deadline without a management company could have resulted in the jail being closed temporarily while Stewart attempted to organize a county-run operation. The changes specified in the approval included: County prisoners are given first priority to be housed in the center. A flat fee is charged to the county by Emerald, whether the prisoner is county or federal. The fee is $51.75 per day per prisoner. More definition of who will provide transport personnel and under what circumstances. The county provides the vehicles in all cases. Pre-adjudication, Emerald will furnish the driver/guard. After adjudication, the County Sheriff's Department will handle the job. Sheriff Rick Virden detailed some other situations where his department would be responsible, which included someone who commits an offense inside the county and is arrested outside New Mexico. No psychological evaluation is required for employees. Patiño said in Texas, no correctional officers are required to be evaluated. Insurance coverage was increased from $1 million to $3 million for occurrences and limits of liability. A provision for a performance bond was eliminated. In subsequent option years, the rates will not be increased by Emerald more than a 2.5 cap on the Consumer Price Index. Stewart said he was extremely encouraged by the contract and the attitude of company executives. "The company is forward-looking and they are discussing options for the future," he said. The center holds 144 prisoners. He based his operating calculations on 130 inmates, Stewart said, adding, the more beds that can be leased to federal law enforcement agencies, the better the financial break for the county. He anticipates a $388,000 increase and an annual operating budget of $2,760,538, "but that covers more officers and a facility up-to-par with standards by the American Corrections Association," Stewart said. Revenues generated by bed rentals and other sources will offset about $1,360,000, leaving the cost to the county at $1.4 million. Stewart said the company's reputation is good and Lee just returned from an operation they run in Israel. Morel said a quality assurance plan will be brought back to the commission later that will cover employee training requirements.

Lytton Springs, Texas
January 5, 2008 Austin American-Statesman
A company has canceled plans to build a detention center in Caldwell County for immigrants awaiting deportation in the face of strong opposition from residents concerned about their safety, county officials said. About 150 people attended a public meeting about the project Dec. 27 in Lytton Springs, and at least 90 percent of them opposed the project, Caldwell County Precinct 4 Commissioner Joe Roland said. "They were pretty forceful," he said of the residents. On Dec. 10, Louisiana-based Emerald Correctional Management LLC, which manages three correctional facilities in Texas, pitched the idea of a $30 million, 1,000-bed facility to be built in northeastern Caldwell County to county commissioners. Residents of the sparsely populated area were concerned about the dangers of living near a detention center. Some questioned whether there would be enough water to serve the center and whether Emerald would be able to fill all the jobs there, Roland said. Mike Moore, Emerald's director of business development, told the Statesman in December that money to construct the center would come from private sources. The facility would be a staging area for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Adult men and women would be housed separately, he said, and no children or families would be held there. Moore said federal immigration officials in San Antonio had told him that the agency needed a 1,000-bed facility within a 30-minute drive of Austin-Bergstrom International Airport and of Interstate 35. The proposed facility would have a $4 million to $5 million annual payroll and generate 200 to 225 jobs in Caldwell County and an additional 200 jobs in the region, Moore said in December. Moore did not return calls Friday. Commissioners will vote on formally ending discussion of the project at their Jan. 14 meeting, Roland said.

Rolling Plains Regional Jail and Detention Center, Haskell, Texas
May 11, 2008 Washington Post
Neil Sampson, who ran the DIHS as interim director most of last year, left that job with serious questions about the government's commitment. Sampson said in an interview that ICE treated detainee health care "as an afterthought," reflecting what he called a failure of leadership and management at the Homeland Security Department. "They do not have a clear idea or philosophy of their approach to health care [for detainees]," he said. "It's a system failure, not a failure of individuals." A new director for health services arrived six months ago, following a stretch when the agency was run first by Sampson and then by a second interim director. The new boss is LaMont W. Flanagan, who brought with him the credential of having been fired in 2003 by the state of Maryland for bad management and spending practices supervising detention and pretrial services. An audit found that Flanagan had signed off on payments of $145,000 for employee entertainment and other ill-advised expenditures. His reputation was such that the District of Columbia would not hire him for a juvenile-justice position. "Another death that needs to be added to the roster," Diane Aker, the DIHS chief health administrator, tapped out in an e-mail to a records clerk at headquarters on Aug. 14, 2007. Juan Guevara-Lorano, 21, was dead. Guevara, an unemployed legal U.S. resident with a young son, was arrested in El Paso for driving illegal border-crossers farther into the city. He was paid $50. An entry-level emergency medical technician, with barely any training, had done Guevara's intake screening and physical assessment at the Otero County immigration compound in New Mexico. Under DIHS rules, those tasks are supposed to be done by a nurse. After two difficult months in detention, Guevara had decided not to appeal his case. He would go back to Mexico with his family. But on Aug. 4, he came down with a splitting headache, what he called a nine on a pain scale of 10, his medical records show. The rookie medical technician prescribed Tylenol and referred Guevara to the compound's physician "due to severity of headache ... and dizziness," according to medical records. But Guevara never saw a doctor. Eight days after the first incident, he vomited in his cell. The same junior technician came to help but was unable to insert a nasal airway tube. Guevara was taken to a hospital, where doctors determined an aneurism in his brain had burst. His wife, pregnant at the time with their second child, recalled that she rushed to the hospital but ICE guards would not let her inside, until the Mexican Consulate interceded. Guevara's mother waited five hours before they let her in. By then he was brain-dead. "My son is not coming back," sobbed Ana Celia Lozano months later, sitting in Guevara's small mobile home as her grandson played on the floor. "I want to know how he lived and died, nothing more." What appears to be the most incriminating document in Guevara's case has been partially blacked out. Still, what is left shows that he did not receive adequate care. "The detainee was not seen or evaluated by an RN, midlevel or physician. . . . At the time of the incident on 8/12/2007, the detainee was seen and examined by EMTs." Each immigration facility is allotted a different number of positions, and a shortage of doctors and nurses is not unusual at centers across the country. Records from February show that about 30 percent of all DIHS positions in the field were unfilled. ICE officials said last week that the current vacancy rate is 21 percent. Concern about the vacancies is voiced repeatedly at clinical directors' meetings. "How do we state our concerns so that we can be heard? . . . this is a CRITICAL condition. . . . We have bitten off more than we can chew," a physician wrote in the minutes of one meeting last summer. In some prisons, the staffing shortages are acute. The Willacy County detention center in South Texas -- the largest compound, with 2,018 detainees -- has no clinical director, no pharmacist and only a part-time psychiatrist. Nearly 50 percent of the nursing positions were unfilled at the 1,500-detainee Eloy, Ariz., prison in February. At the newly opened 744-bed Jena., La., compound, nurses run the place. It has no clinical director, no staff physician, no psychiatrist and no professional dental staff. Last August, Sampson, who was then DIHS interim director, warned his superiors at ICE that critical personnel shortages were making it impossible to staff the Jena facility adequately. In a vociferous e-mail to Gary Mead, the ICE deputy director in charge of detention centers, he wrote: "With the Jena request we have been re-examining our capabilities to meet health care needs at a new site when we are facing critical staffing shortages at most every other DIHS site. While we developed, executed and achieved major successes in our recruitment efforts we have been unable to meet the demand." The slow ICE security-clearance process forced many job applicants to go elsewhere, Sampson wrote. Of the 312 people who applied for new positions over the past year, 200 withdrew, he wrote, because they found other jobs during the 250 days it took ICE, on average, to conduct the required background investigations. Last week, ICE officials said the average wait had decreased recently to 37 days. These shortages have burdened the remaining staff. In July 2007, a year after Osman's death in Otay Mesa, medical director Hui strongly complained to headquarters about workload stress. "The level of burnout . . . is high and rising," she wrote in an e-mail. "I know that I have been averaging approximately 2-6 hrs of overtime daily for the past 2 months. I will no longer be able to sustain this pace and will be decreasing the number of hours that I work overtime. This being said, more will be left undone because we simply do NOT have the staff." The overcrowding has created a petri dish for the spread of diseases. One mission of the Public Health Service is to detect infectious diseases and contain them before they spread, but last summer, the gigantic Willacy center was hit by a chicken pox outbreak. The illness spread because the facility did not have enough available isolation rooms and its large pods share recycled air, but also because security officers "lack education about the disease and keep moving around detainees from different units without taking into consideration if the unit has been isolated due to heavy exposure," noted the DIHS's top specialist on infectious diseases, Carlos Duchesne. The staff was forced to vaccinate the entire population in mid-July. In one 2007 death, memos and confidential notes show how medical staff missed an infectious disease, meningitis, in their midst. Victor Alfonso Arellano, 23, a transgender Mexican detainee with AIDS, died in custody at the San Pedro center. The first three pages of Duchesne's internal review of the death leave the impression that Arellano's care was proper. But the last page, under the heading "Off the record observations and recommendations," takes a decidedly critical tone: "The clinical staff at all levels fails to recognize early signs and symptoms of meningitis. . . . Pt was evaluated multiple times and an effort to rule out those infections was not even mentioned." Arellano was given a "completely useless" antibiotic, Duchesne wrote. Lab work that should have been performed immediately took 22 days because San Pedro's clinical director had ordered staff members to withhold lab work for new detainees until they had been in detention there "for more than 30 days," a violation of agency rules. "I am sure that there must be a reason why this was mandated but that practice is particularly dangerous with chronic care cases and specially is particularly dangerous with . . . HIV/AIDS patients," Duchesne wrote. "Labs for AIDS patients . . . must be performed ASAP to know their immune status and where you are standing in reference to disease control and meds." Given the frequency with which ICE moves people within the detention network, keeping track of detainees is critical to stopping the spread of infectious illnesses. The purchase of an electronic records system named CaseTrakker in 2004 was supposed to help. But according to internal documents and interviews, CaseTrakker is so riddled with problems that facilities often revert to handwritten records. A study at one site found that it took one-third more time to use CaseTrakker than to use paper. Thousands of patient files are missing. Recorded data often cannot be retrieved. Day-long outages are common. When detainees are transferred from one facility to another, their records, if they follow them, are often misleading. Some show medications with no medical diagnoses, or "lots of diagnoses but no meds," according to Elizabeth Fleming, a former clinical director at one compound in Arizona. After Yusif Osman's death and the discovery of the problem with his computerized records, the DIHS ordered a review of all charts at the Otay Mesa center. During the review, auditors also found that 260 physical exams were never completed as required. The nurse responsible for the error in Osman's case was reprimanded, but the computer problem was not fixed. The CaseTrakker system "has failed and must be replaced," Sampson, the DIHS interim director, wrote to his ICE supervisors in August. In January 2008, medical director Shack told colleagues that CaseTrakker "is more of a liability than the use of paper medical record system," according to the minutes of a meeting. It "puts patients at risk." ICE officials said last week that they are not satisfied with CaseTrakker and are working to replace it. Along with being at the mercy of computer glitches, detainees suffer from human errors that deny or delay their care. And with few advocates on the outside, they are left alone to plead their cases in the most desperate ways, in hand-scribbled notes to doctors they rarely see. "I need medicine for pain. All my bones hurt. Thank you," wrote Mexico native Roberto Ledesma Guerrero, 72, three weeks before he died inside the Otay Mesa compound. Delays persist throughout the system. In January, the detention center in Pearsall, Tex., an hour from San Antonio, had a backlog of 2,097 appointments. Luis Dubegel-Paez, a 60-year-old Cuban, had filled out many sick call requests before he died on March 14. Detained at the Rolling Plains Detention Facility in the West Texas town of Haskell, he wrote on New Year's Day: "need to see doctor for Heart medication; and having chest pains for the past three days. Can't stand pain." Ten days later he went to the clinic and became upset when he wasn't seen. He slugged the window, yelled, pointed at his wristwatch. He was escorted back to his cell. Another of his sick call requests said: "Need to see a doctor. I have a lot of symptoms of sickness ... as soon as possible!" The next was more urgent: "I have a emergency to see the doctor about my heart problems ... for the last couple days and I been getting dizzy a lot." The next day, Dubegel-Paez collapsed and died. His medical records do not show that he ever saw a doctor for his chest pains.

April 18, 2006 AP
Two Wyoming inmates have been recaptured after escaping from a Texas jail over the weekend, according to the Wyoming Department of Corrections. Joe Wilkinson, 41, gave himself up about two hours after the escape Saturday and didn't get very far from the Rolling Plains Regional Jail and Detention Center in Haskell, Texas, corrections spokeswoman Melinda Brazzale said Monday. Robert Dix, 25, was arrested Sunday night, about 34 hours after the escape. He, too, didn't get far from the prison. Haskell is about 50 miles north of Abilene, Texas. Wyoming keeps many of its inmates there because it doesn't have enough room for them at prisons in Wyoming.

West Carroll Detention Center, Epps, Louisiana
August 29, 2007 The Huntsville Times
The Alabama Department of Corrections said Tuesday that it will transfer 134 male inmates from a private Louisiana prison to the Limestone Correctional Facility as part of a cost-cutting measure. Prisons Commissioner Richard Allen said the transfer is the first of several required to return more than 1,100 Alabama convicts who are housed out of state. "In an attempt to save taxpayer dollars and eliminate our budget shortfall, we plan to return all out-of-state inmates to Alabama by year's end," Allen said in a prepared statement. "This move will allow us to save an estimated $10 million annually on rented bed space." Prior to Tuesday's transfer, 294 male inmates were housed at the West Carroll Detention Center in Epps, La., at a cost of $26.75 per inmate, per day. Alabama inmates are also kept at the J.B. Evans Correctional Facility, South Louisiana Correctional Center and Perry County Detention Center, all owned and operated by Lafayette, La.-based LCS Corrections Services.

July 22, 2007 Houston Chronicle
The weathered guard tower that looms over the east side of the West Carroll Detention Center here is positioned just a home run away from the village's modest baseball diamond and small public school complex. Requisite cyclone fencing and razor wire surround the perimeter of the compound that can house more then 700 prisoners. And within the walls of the the dingy yellow sheet metal building is a fish house where tilapia are grown. During the past 12 years that the private jail has been operated by Emerald Correctional Management, the approximately 600 residents of this economically challenged northeastern Louisiana town have coexisted peacefully with the medium-security jail. The jail has provided much-needed jobs, while Epps and the surrounding area have provided a source of cheap labor. But with the arrival this month of the first 100 of what is expected to be at least 400 prisoners from the chronically overcrowded and understaffed Harris County Jail, residents and leaders of Epps are taking a closer look at their relationship with the private lockup. Chief among their concerns is the possibility that some of the jail's new inmates might decide to bolt. "It's a half-mile from the high school, so the type of prisoner they're bringing in there concerns me," Mayor Jeff Guice said last week. "I live near the jail, too." Millions to be spent - Harris County began shipping prisoners to the jail as part of efforts to meet Texas' state-mandated prisoner-to-guard ratio of 48-to-1. The county also has spent close to $24 million in guard overtime during the past 16 months. This month, Harris County Commissioner's Court approved spending up to $4 million during the next six months to relocate up to 400 prisoners — and perhaps more — to Epps. Officials with the sheriff's office, which operates the county jail system of more than 9,000 inmates, say that all the prisoners transferred to Louisiana will have been convicted of state jail felonies — nonviolent crimes often involving drug use and with sentences of two years or less. But that information has been slow in making its way to Louisiana. Last week, Epps officials met with about a dozen local residents in a town meeting called in response to the transfer of the big city criminals to this one-traffic-light community. So far, the mayor says, neither he nor the police chief has been able to get information — such as the number of inmates and the crimes for which they were convicted — from the private jail officials or Emerald. "We're trying to get on top of the situation," Guice said. According to the contract between Epps and Emerald, the city "shall have access to all reports and data maintained by Emerald with respect to the operation of the (jail) including, but not limited to, a listing of all inmates and the charges upon which they were convicted." Like the mayor, Police Chief Roosevelt Porter was elected to office in January. He says he is concerned about the qualifications of the guards at the private jail. "I assume they have some training, but I don't know," Porter said. 'Adequate' - Porter's words are of no comfort to Kathelene Donohue, 64, who lives with her three grandchildren, ages 6, 4 and 2, seven miles north of Epps. "He should have known how many prisoners were coming, when they were coming and why they were coming," Donohue said. "It's a private facility and they tell you right up front that they don't have to tell you anything." Both the mayor and chief say they are still reviewing the contract between the city and Emerald. A 2004 Louisiana Department of Corrections audit of the Epps facility described its staffing as "adequate" and stated that inspectors were "totally impressed" with the facility's cleanliness and organization. The audit made no mention of the fish house. Silent on issue - Emerald CEO Clay Lee did not respond to questions about his jail's fish operation. The contract states that all food grown at the jail shall be consumed by inmates and staff or donated to nonprofit charitable organizations. Lee also refused the Chronicle's request for a tour of the jail, saying he was acting on orders of the Harris County Sheriff's Office. HCSO Chief Deputy Mike Smith says Lee was given no such directive. Lee would not discuss the Shreveport-based company's contract with the city of Epps or what the company pays its guards, how many guards the site employs or what qualifications they have. "I'll look so bad in the paper telling you what these guys make, compared to what a correctional officer makes in Texas," Lee said in an earlier interview. A spokeswoman for the Louisiana Department of Corrections did not return calls about private guard qualifications. Starting pay for Louisiana DOC guards is $1,530 a month — $18,360 a year or about $9.56 an hour — with an increase to $1,700 a month at the end of a six-month training and probationary period, according to the agency's Web site. Few employment options - Though Lee refuses to discuss how much his private guards make, the owners of the only grocery store in Epps say it isn't as much as the Louisiana DOC guards. "We cash (the guard's) paychecks, and I can tell you they make about $6 an hour — or about what we pay our clerks," said Crystal Hale, 33, who runs the Best Way market with her husband, Timmy, 45. The couple describe the area around Epps as "economically depressed" farmland where residents have few employment options beside agriculture. Surrounded by miles and miles of corn fields, Epps is in the lower Mississippi River valley, 400 miles northeast of Houston. Only three of the state jail facilities in Texas are farther from Houston than Epps. But the distance is just one of the hurdles facing anyone making the trip from Houston. In addition to the minimum seven-hour trip by car, visitors must also be preapproved by jail officials. Prisoners must provide background information on any potential visitor. A check is then run on each of those persons, according to jail visitation rules. Visiting hours are from 1 to 5 p.m. Saturday and Sunday — but only on one of the days, not both.