Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
Terrace, B.C. - THE CITY is banking on the federal government sending more people to jail for longer periods of time if its hope of an economy-boosting jail here is to be realized.
A city co-sponsored feasibility study lists three pieces of legislation the federal government wants passed, each one of which would result in more people headed for federal jail cells.
One piece of legislation calls for minimum sentences for serious drug cases, another would end the practice of lopping off two days for every day a person is sentenced if that person has been in jail since first arrested and another would impose mandatory jail time for fraud.
The new sentence requirements could boost the federal jail population by 70 per cent, the study suggests.
The $4,000 study, cost shared fifty-fifty between the city and Northern Development Initiative (NDI) Trust, also quotes a newspaper article citing a federal plan to spend nearly $500 million on jails between 2011 and 2013.
City council and NDI commissioned the study last fall.
NDI chief executive officer Janine North said that while it doesn’t tell any municipality what ideas to explore, it will help provide more information.
NDI is a regional economic development corporation that aims to stimulate economic diversification and job creation in the region.
“Terrace is a community that is looking how to diversify and expand its tax base,” she said, pointing out that a provincial jail in Prince George has had a positive economic impact for that community.
The Terrace feasibility study forecasts a facility holding 400 prisoners would cost $170 million to build and have an annual operating budget of $42 million.
A location has already been picked out – 15 to 20 hectares within the proposed airport lands industrial park.
“As we see the industry base weakening....one should explore other options that aren’t as cyclical,” North said.
The study also says that a facility located in rural northern B.C. would allow inmates to stay near their home communities, and points out that technology makes it easier for inmates to receive sentencing, visitations, and specialized counselling services through video links.
“In B.C., there certainly has been some controversy over the past couple of years of communities wanting or not wanting correctional facilities in the Lower Mainland,” North said.
“I think that in the north, we tend to be more open to exploring a fact base before saying ‘not in my backyard.’ And with recent changes federally, and with money that is in provincial and federal budgets targeted in the next several years for new facilities...it’s a reasonable question to ask how they impact the economy.”
Terrace mayor Dave Pernarwoski raised the prospect of a federal jail in a presentation to provincial politicians in Victoria recently.
And Terrace city council recently invited Skeena NDP MLA Robin Austin to a meeting, requesting his help in lobbying the federal government for such a facility.
For his part, Austin said it is best to start with Skeena-Bulkley Valley MP Nathan Cullen.
Austin later said he’d be in a better position to assist if the city wanted a provincial jail.
There was a provincial jail here but it was closed as a provincial cost-saving measure in 2002.
Austin said it made no sense to close the jail because it provided jobs and kept inmates close to families.
The city has now asked Cullen for a meeting to take place later this month.
The following is the feasibility study prepared by the Northern Development Initiative Trust and the City of Terrace on the prospect of building a federal prison here.
The study is entitled, The Economic Impact of a Rural Correctional Facility. An Opportunity for Terrace, British Columbia.
Executive Summary
The construction of a new correctional facility in Terrace, BC would provide socio‐economic benefits directly to the community and surrounding areas. Not only will the economy benefit from jobs created for construction and operating within the community, but the sociological benefits of interning prisoners near their communities and families should not be discounted.
There is a foreseeable increase in sentence terms and numbers of inmates which will necessitate additional inmate capacity. Currently there is insufficient capacity to absorb any significant increase in inmate populations. Existing public opinion is against increased prisoner capacity to be built in high density population centres and future locations should in communities that support the undertaking.
The community of Terrace has expressed interest and support as a location of a future correctional facility. An appropriate location has been identified for construction of a new correctional facility. The economic impact of a new facility within the community would be approximately $170 million in construction costs with an annual operating budget of $42 million.
Over a 20 year period, the construction and operations of a new correctional facility in Terrace would have a direct economic impact of $862 million.
Introduction
The construction of new correctional facilities is required to support expected increased inmate populations in the next three to five years. The placement of new facilities should be in locations and communities that support them.
This makes it easier to move forward with the facilities and provides significant economic opportunities for those communities.
This report examines the basis for new correctional facilities, the economic impact from construction and operations, and the overall benefit to Terrace, a rural community in Northern British Columbia.
Background
A number of bills introduced by the federal government in the House of Commons are expected to be passed into law. These bills are expected to have an impact on inmate population in both federal and provincial correctional facilities.
Bill C‐15: Minimum Sentences
On February 27, 2009 the Minister of Justice, the Honourable Robert Nicholson, introduced in the House of Commons Bill C‐15 to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Library of Parliament, 2009a).
Bill C‐15 seeks to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”) and thereby the Criminal Code to impose minimum sentences for certain serious drug offenses such as dealing drugs for organized crime purposes or when a weapon or violence is involved.
Bill C‐15 specifically mentions that in 2006/07 that approximately fifty percent of all drug‐related court cases do not result in convictions and convictions rarely result in sentencing incarceration. The majority of offenders only receive probation. This data has drawn the conclusion that there are not sufficient penalties defined in the CDSA to act as a dete rrent.
Currently the CDSA does impose maximum penalties for drug offences but there are currently no mandatory minimum penalties for drug related offences. Primarily the CDSA offences include possession, “double doctoring,” trafficking, importing and exporting, and production of substances denoted within the CDSA.
Bill C‐25: Credit for Time Served
On March 27, 2009 the Minister of Justice also introduced in the House Bill C‐25 to amend the Criminal Code to limit the credit a judge may allow for any time spent in pre‐sentencing custody (Library of Parliament, 2009b). This limit is meant to reduce the “credit for time served” and impose longer incarceration periods. Bill C‐25 is also known as the Truth in Sentencing Act.
Currently the Criminal Code allows the courts to take into consideration time spent in pre‐sentencing custody. According to the Criminal Code the court is not required to do so; however the Supreme Court of Canada has the opinion that courts must justify any reason for not reducing sentences by taking into account pre‐sentencing custody time (R. v. Wust, 2000).
This has resulted in the majority of cases whereby sentencing convictions are reduced by double or, in some jurisdictions, triple time spent in pre‐sentencing custody. This has provided an incentive for in‐custody accused expecting to be convicted to maximize the pre‐sentencing custody timeframe to ultimately minimize the resulting incarceration time. The changes introduced in Bill C‐25 will result in a one day for one day recognition of pre‐sentencing custody or in rare occasions one and one‐half days when pre‐sentencing custody is determined to have circumstances that warrant greater recognition.
Bill C‐52: Mandatory Jail Sentence for Fraud
On October 21, 2009 the Minister of Justice also introduced in the House Bill C‐52 to amend the Criminal Code (Sentencing for Fraud) and creates a mandatory jail sentence for fraud over $1 million (Library of Parliament, 2009c). Bill C‐52 is also known as the Retribution on Behalf of Victims of White Collar Crime Act.
The aim of Bill C‐52 is to provide restitution for victims of large scale fraud and permit the courts to impose mandatory jail sentences after consideration of victim and community impact statements.
Generally these impact statements will provide the courts with additional factors when considering sentencing such as the financial and psychological impact of the fraud on the victim(s) and their resulting circumstances.
Inmate Population Implications
All of these bills will result in significant increases in prison populations. The minimum increase for Bill C‐ 15 alone is expected to be 10% (Scoffield, 2009) and together the bills have the possibility of increasing prison populations of upwards to 70%.
When the United States implemented similar sentencing policies
in 1985 there was an increase in prison populations over 15 years of 700% (Drucker, 1999).
The volume of incarcerated offenders has reached critical capacity, evidenced by inmate‐to‐cell occupancy levels averaging 185 per cent in provincial correctional facilities (Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, 2009). The challenge for many of these facilities are that they were constructed in 1800s and early 1900s, are expensive to maintain and difficult to increase inmate capacity. It has been recommended that construction of mixed‐use regional facilities be constructed to both deal with organic prison population growth and the likely results of a tough on crime political approach.
These mixed‐use facilities would incorporate distinct minimum, medium, and maximum security areas within a common complex. These regional complexes could have as few as 500 inmates up to a maximum of 2,000 (Correctional Services Canada Review Panel, 2007).
The regional complexes would be outfitted with advanced technology to permit video remand, sentencing, and visitation. The benefit of regional complexes is a model of more effectively correctional management and reduced cost as inmates would not be required to be transported for court hearings, change of status from remand to sentence, or to facilitate visitation.
Additionally population density within a facility would allow inmates to access a broader range of support services such as physical health, mental health, drug treatment programs, et cetera without being required to be transported offsite for specialized support.
The maintenance of inmates within the same regional facility from remand, during the sentence, and reintegration also has benefits of improve community and familial relationships and support to improve quality of life issues (Canadian Families and Corrections Network, 2007).
An independent review commissioned by Correctional Services Canada conducted by Deloitte & Touche suggested that moving forward with “business as usual” methodologies and practices should not be applied to the regional complex model and “new operating approaches and standards” should be considered for this new transformational business model.
Economic Impact Analysis
Correctional facilities have a significant and bone fide economic impact on the communities they are situated within. This impact is both during for capital and operational reasons. Capital reasons include new construction and infrastructure maintenance. Operational reasons include human resources and consumable supplies required to house the inmates.
Capital Investment Budgets
During the period of 2008/09 through to 2012/13 the Province of British Columbia initially expected to construct three separate correctional facility projects for an estimated total cost of $185 million (Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, 2009).
This was prior to the three bills introduced in the House this year which will likely require significant capital investment across the country to build additional correctional facilities to house the increased inmate population.
The federal government has budgeted $487.9 million for correctional facility infrastructure from fiscal 2011 through to fiscal 2013 (Curry, 2009).
It is projected that during the same fiscal periods a capital budget of $817.1 million would be required to maintain existing infrastructure and build incremental bed capacity (Correctional Services Canada Review Panel, 2007).
For a minimum security cell the capital cost would be $200,000, for a medium cell $400,000 and for a maximum cell, $400,000.
The mix would be 12 per cent minimum, 39 per cent medium and 49 per cent maximum.
The capital cost to construct a regional complex is attributed based on population mix and ranges from approximately $212 million to $842 million (Deloitte, 2007). Based on the lowest range of inmate population increases, a minimum of 3,600 additional cells would be required for a minimum capital cost of $1.53 billion.
British Columbia houses approximately 14.6% of the federally incarcerated inmates and could be expected to invest at least $256 million in capital correctional facility construction in the next three years to meet minimum inmate population increases.
Facility Operating Cost
Federal and provincial data suggest a consistency of 2.06 inmates per employee in correctional facilities (Correctional Service Canada, 2009; van Dongen, 2009). It is uncertain the cost of inmate incarceration as there is a disparity of operating costs across various jurisdictions. The news media suggests the highest cost of $101,000 a year per male and $185,000 a year per female (Jones & Pate, 2009) which is assumed to be a maximum security cost. Financial reports from Corrections Services Canada suggest a b lended average cost per inmate of approximately $104,522 per year.
Ontario statistics suggest incarceration costs ranging from $110,223 for male inmates and $150,867 for female inmates in maximum security correctional facilities to a low of $70,000 for medium and minimum security correctional facilities (Basen, 2006).
Terrace Opportunity
The opportunity exists within rural Northern British Columbia to construct a new correctional facility. A new facility located in rural Northern British Columbia would be in alignment with the beneficial effects of remanding inmates near their home communities. The advent of technology is making it easier for inmates to receive sentencing, visitations, and specialized counselling services through video conferencing.
It is proposed that a facility housing approximately 400 inmates could be constructed within the community of Terrace in Northern British Columbia.
Background
The community of Terrace has expressed interest in exploring the economic impact of constructing a potential correctional facility in the community to support the growing need of new facilities for inmates. It is normal practice for a municipality to research information on new initiatives when exploring economic opportunities.
Location
The proposed location for construction of a new correctional facility location is in a planned light industrial near the Terrace Airport (Figure 1). The industrial area is East of Highway 16 and comprises approximately 114 hectares of land. The needs for the new correctional facility would likely be between 15 and 20 hectares.
The location is ideal for its proximity to the airport, and access to highway 37 for transportation purposes.
It is also unlikely there would be any opposition to the location due to its distance from residential neighbourhoods.
Construction Economic Impact
It would be estimated that a 400 inmate population correctional facility would maintain the typical housing composition of minimum, medium, and maximum inmates. It would be expected that total capital construction cost would be approximately $170,000,000.00.
The size of the facility would be approximately 280,000 square feet of floor space. The construction process would source raw materials, simple fabricated products, and skilled labour from the local community. It is uncertain how much those portions would comprise of the approximate construction costs however it would be reasonable to assume that at least 20% of total project costs.
According to the Correctional Service of Canada, the capital construction process from the planning stage to full occupation for a new facility would be approximately 15 years.
This period is considered to be extremely long and disproportionate of the typical construction period of large capital projects. It would be expected that the time frame could be reduced by approximately 60% to five years.
Operations Economic Impact
Utilizing details from the Correctional Service of Canada a correctional facility in Terrace would require a n annual operating budget of approximately $42 million. This operating budget encompasses all inmate costs and facility maintenance costs. Of that operating budget, approximately 68%, or $28.5 million, of the budget is for payroll and benefits costs which are primarily spent within the local community (Correctional Service Canada, 2008).
Of the remaining budget, it is uncertain how much of the operating and maintenance costs would be spent within the local community. It is reasonable to assume that a portion of the remaining budget would be spent within the community of Terrace.
Conclusion
The construction of a new 400 inmate correctional facility in Terrace would provide direct economic impacts over the next 20 years of approximately $862 million dollars assuming an annual inflation rate over that period of two (2%) percent. The support of the community for this type of facility would also ease the process and provide greater involvement with the inmate population and their families to improve the overall quality of life and outcomes.
NewsHawk: User: 420 Magazine - Cannabis Culture News & Reviews
Source: Terrace Standard
Author: Kat Lee
Copyright: 2010 Terrace Standard
Contact: Terrace Standard - Terrace Standard
Website: Terrace Standard - Terrace Standard
• Thanks to MedicalNeed for submitting this article
A city co-sponsored feasibility study lists three pieces of legislation the federal government wants passed, each one of which would result in more people headed for federal jail cells.
One piece of legislation calls for minimum sentences for serious drug cases, another would end the practice of lopping off two days for every day a person is sentenced if that person has been in jail since first arrested and another would impose mandatory jail time for fraud.
The new sentence requirements could boost the federal jail population by 70 per cent, the study suggests.
The $4,000 study, cost shared fifty-fifty between the city and Northern Development Initiative (NDI) Trust, also quotes a newspaper article citing a federal plan to spend nearly $500 million on jails between 2011 and 2013.
City council and NDI commissioned the study last fall.
NDI chief executive officer Janine North said that while it doesn’t tell any municipality what ideas to explore, it will help provide more information.
NDI is a regional economic development corporation that aims to stimulate economic diversification and job creation in the region.
“Terrace is a community that is looking how to diversify and expand its tax base,” she said, pointing out that a provincial jail in Prince George has had a positive economic impact for that community.
The Terrace feasibility study forecasts a facility holding 400 prisoners would cost $170 million to build and have an annual operating budget of $42 million.
A location has already been picked out – 15 to 20 hectares within the proposed airport lands industrial park.
“As we see the industry base weakening....one should explore other options that aren’t as cyclical,” North said.
The study also says that a facility located in rural northern B.C. would allow inmates to stay near their home communities, and points out that technology makes it easier for inmates to receive sentencing, visitations, and specialized counselling services through video links.
“In B.C., there certainly has been some controversy over the past couple of years of communities wanting or not wanting correctional facilities in the Lower Mainland,” North said.
“I think that in the north, we tend to be more open to exploring a fact base before saying ‘not in my backyard.’ And with recent changes federally, and with money that is in provincial and federal budgets targeted in the next several years for new facilities...it’s a reasonable question to ask how they impact the economy.”
Terrace mayor Dave Pernarwoski raised the prospect of a federal jail in a presentation to provincial politicians in Victoria recently.
And Terrace city council recently invited Skeena NDP MLA Robin Austin to a meeting, requesting his help in lobbying the federal government for such a facility.
For his part, Austin said it is best to start with Skeena-Bulkley Valley MP Nathan Cullen.
Austin later said he’d be in a better position to assist if the city wanted a provincial jail.
There was a provincial jail here but it was closed as a provincial cost-saving measure in 2002.
Austin said it made no sense to close the jail because it provided jobs and kept inmates close to families.
The city has now asked Cullen for a meeting to take place later this month.
The following is the feasibility study prepared by the Northern Development Initiative Trust and the City of Terrace on the prospect of building a federal prison here.
The study is entitled, The Economic Impact of a Rural Correctional Facility. An Opportunity for Terrace, British Columbia.
Executive Summary
The construction of a new correctional facility in Terrace, BC would provide socio‐economic benefits directly to the community and surrounding areas. Not only will the economy benefit from jobs created for construction and operating within the community, but the sociological benefits of interning prisoners near their communities and families should not be discounted.
There is a foreseeable increase in sentence terms and numbers of inmates which will necessitate additional inmate capacity. Currently there is insufficient capacity to absorb any significant increase in inmate populations. Existing public opinion is against increased prisoner capacity to be built in high density population centres and future locations should in communities that support the undertaking.
The community of Terrace has expressed interest and support as a location of a future correctional facility. An appropriate location has been identified for construction of a new correctional facility. The economic impact of a new facility within the community would be approximately $170 million in construction costs with an annual operating budget of $42 million.
Over a 20 year period, the construction and operations of a new correctional facility in Terrace would have a direct economic impact of $862 million.
Introduction
The construction of new correctional facilities is required to support expected increased inmate populations in the next three to five years. The placement of new facilities should be in locations and communities that support them.
This makes it easier to move forward with the facilities and provides significant economic opportunities for those communities.
This report examines the basis for new correctional facilities, the economic impact from construction and operations, and the overall benefit to Terrace, a rural community in Northern British Columbia.
Background
A number of bills introduced by the federal government in the House of Commons are expected to be passed into law. These bills are expected to have an impact on inmate population in both federal and provincial correctional facilities.
Bill C‐15: Minimum Sentences
On February 27, 2009 the Minister of Justice, the Honourable Robert Nicholson, introduced in the House of Commons Bill C‐15 to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Library of Parliament, 2009a).
Bill C‐15 seeks to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”) and thereby the Criminal Code to impose minimum sentences for certain serious drug offenses such as dealing drugs for organized crime purposes or when a weapon or violence is involved.
Bill C‐15 specifically mentions that in 2006/07 that approximately fifty percent of all drug‐related court cases do not result in convictions and convictions rarely result in sentencing incarceration. The majority of offenders only receive probation. This data has drawn the conclusion that there are not sufficient penalties defined in the CDSA to act as a dete rrent.
Currently the CDSA does impose maximum penalties for drug offences but there are currently no mandatory minimum penalties for drug related offences. Primarily the CDSA offences include possession, “double doctoring,” trafficking, importing and exporting, and production of substances denoted within the CDSA.
Bill C‐25: Credit for Time Served
On March 27, 2009 the Minister of Justice also introduced in the House Bill C‐25 to amend the Criminal Code to limit the credit a judge may allow for any time spent in pre‐sentencing custody (Library of Parliament, 2009b). This limit is meant to reduce the “credit for time served” and impose longer incarceration periods. Bill C‐25 is also known as the Truth in Sentencing Act.
Currently the Criminal Code allows the courts to take into consideration time spent in pre‐sentencing custody. According to the Criminal Code the court is not required to do so; however the Supreme Court of Canada has the opinion that courts must justify any reason for not reducing sentences by taking into account pre‐sentencing custody time (R. v. Wust, 2000).
This has resulted in the majority of cases whereby sentencing convictions are reduced by double or, in some jurisdictions, triple time spent in pre‐sentencing custody. This has provided an incentive for in‐custody accused expecting to be convicted to maximize the pre‐sentencing custody timeframe to ultimately minimize the resulting incarceration time. The changes introduced in Bill C‐25 will result in a one day for one day recognition of pre‐sentencing custody or in rare occasions one and one‐half days when pre‐sentencing custody is determined to have circumstances that warrant greater recognition.
Bill C‐52: Mandatory Jail Sentence for Fraud
On October 21, 2009 the Minister of Justice also introduced in the House Bill C‐52 to amend the Criminal Code (Sentencing for Fraud) and creates a mandatory jail sentence for fraud over $1 million (Library of Parliament, 2009c). Bill C‐52 is also known as the Retribution on Behalf of Victims of White Collar Crime Act.
The aim of Bill C‐52 is to provide restitution for victims of large scale fraud and permit the courts to impose mandatory jail sentences after consideration of victim and community impact statements.
Generally these impact statements will provide the courts with additional factors when considering sentencing such as the financial and psychological impact of the fraud on the victim(s) and their resulting circumstances.
Inmate Population Implications
All of these bills will result in significant increases in prison populations. The minimum increase for Bill C‐ 15 alone is expected to be 10% (Scoffield, 2009) and together the bills have the possibility of increasing prison populations of upwards to 70%.
When the United States implemented similar sentencing policies
in 1985 there was an increase in prison populations over 15 years of 700% (Drucker, 1999).
The volume of incarcerated offenders has reached critical capacity, evidenced by inmate‐to‐cell occupancy levels averaging 185 per cent in provincial correctional facilities (Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, 2009). The challenge for many of these facilities are that they were constructed in 1800s and early 1900s, are expensive to maintain and difficult to increase inmate capacity. It has been recommended that construction of mixed‐use regional facilities be constructed to both deal with organic prison population growth and the likely results of a tough on crime political approach.
These mixed‐use facilities would incorporate distinct minimum, medium, and maximum security areas within a common complex. These regional complexes could have as few as 500 inmates up to a maximum of 2,000 (Correctional Services Canada Review Panel, 2007).
The regional complexes would be outfitted with advanced technology to permit video remand, sentencing, and visitation. The benefit of regional complexes is a model of more effectively correctional management and reduced cost as inmates would not be required to be transported for court hearings, change of status from remand to sentence, or to facilitate visitation.
Additionally population density within a facility would allow inmates to access a broader range of support services such as physical health, mental health, drug treatment programs, et cetera without being required to be transported offsite for specialized support.
The maintenance of inmates within the same regional facility from remand, during the sentence, and reintegration also has benefits of improve community and familial relationships and support to improve quality of life issues (Canadian Families and Corrections Network, 2007).
An independent review commissioned by Correctional Services Canada conducted by Deloitte & Touche suggested that moving forward with “business as usual” methodologies and practices should not be applied to the regional complex model and “new operating approaches and standards” should be considered for this new transformational business model.
Economic Impact Analysis
Correctional facilities have a significant and bone fide economic impact on the communities they are situated within. This impact is both during for capital and operational reasons. Capital reasons include new construction and infrastructure maintenance. Operational reasons include human resources and consumable supplies required to house the inmates.
Capital Investment Budgets
During the period of 2008/09 through to 2012/13 the Province of British Columbia initially expected to construct three separate correctional facility projects for an estimated total cost of $185 million (Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, 2009).
This was prior to the three bills introduced in the House this year which will likely require significant capital investment across the country to build additional correctional facilities to house the increased inmate population.
The federal government has budgeted $487.9 million for correctional facility infrastructure from fiscal 2011 through to fiscal 2013 (Curry, 2009).
It is projected that during the same fiscal periods a capital budget of $817.1 million would be required to maintain existing infrastructure and build incremental bed capacity (Correctional Services Canada Review Panel, 2007).
For a minimum security cell the capital cost would be $200,000, for a medium cell $400,000 and for a maximum cell, $400,000.
The mix would be 12 per cent minimum, 39 per cent medium and 49 per cent maximum.
The capital cost to construct a regional complex is attributed based on population mix and ranges from approximately $212 million to $842 million (Deloitte, 2007). Based on the lowest range of inmate population increases, a minimum of 3,600 additional cells would be required for a minimum capital cost of $1.53 billion.
British Columbia houses approximately 14.6% of the federally incarcerated inmates and could be expected to invest at least $256 million in capital correctional facility construction in the next three years to meet minimum inmate population increases.
Facility Operating Cost
Federal and provincial data suggest a consistency of 2.06 inmates per employee in correctional facilities (Correctional Service Canada, 2009; van Dongen, 2009). It is uncertain the cost of inmate incarceration as there is a disparity of operating costs across various jurisdictions. The news media suggests the highest cost of $101,000 a year per male and $185,000 a year per female (Jones & Pate, 2009) which is assumed to be a maximum security cost. Financial reports from Corrections Services Canada suggest a b lended average cost per inmate of approximately $104,522 per year.
Ontario statistics suggest incarceration costs ranging from $110,223 for male inmates and $150,867 for female inmates in maximum security correctional facilities to a low of $70,000 for medium and minimum security correctional facilities (Basen, 2006).
Terrace Opportunity
The opportunity exists within rural Northern British Columbia to construct a new correctional facility. A new facility located in rural Northern British Columbia would be in alignment with the beneficial effects of remanding inmates near their home communities. The advent of technology is making it easier for inmates to receive sentencing, visitations, and specialized counselling services through video conferencing.
It is proposed that a facility housing approximately 400 inmates could be constructed within the community of Terrace in Northern British Columbia.
Background
The community of Terrace has expressed interest in exploring the economic impact of constructing a potential correctional facility in the community to support the growing need of new facilities for inmates. It is normal practice for a municipality to research information on new initiatives when exploring economic opportunities.
Location
The proposed location for construction of a new correctional facility location is in a planned light industrial near the Terrace Airport (Figure 1). The industrial area is East of Highway 16 and comprises approximately 114 hectares of land. The needs for the new correctional facility would likely be between 15 and 20 hectares.
The location is ideal for its proximity to the airport, and access to highway 37 for transportation purposes.
It is also unlikely there would be any opposition to the location due to its distance from residential neighbourhoods.
Construction Economic Impact
It would be estimated that a 400 inmate population correctional facility would maintain the typical housing composition of minimum, medium, and maximum inmates. It would be expected that total capital construction cost would be approximately $170,000,000.00.
The size of the facility would be approximately 280,000 square feet of floor space. The construction process would source raw materials, simple fabricated products, and skilled labour from the local community. It is uncertain how much those portions would comprise of the approximate construction costs however it would be reasonable to assume that at least 20% of total project costs.
According to the Correctional Service of Canada, the capital construction process from the planning stage to full occupation for a new facility would be approximately 15 years.
This period is considered to be extremely long and disproportionate of the typical construction period of large capital projects. It would be expected that the time frame could be reduced by approximately 60% to five years.
Operations Economic Impact
Utilizing details from the Correctional Service of Canada a correctional facility in Terrace would require a n annual operating budget of approximately $42 million. This operating budget encompasses all inmate costs and facility maintenance costs. Of that operating budget, approximately 68%, or $28.5 million, of the budget is for payroll and benefits costs which are primarily spent within the local community (Correctional Service Canada, 2008).
Of the remaining budget, it is uncertain how much of the operating and maintenance costs would be spent within the local community. It is reasonable to assume that a portion of the remaining budget would be spent within the community of Terrace.
Conclusion
The construction of a new 400 inmate correctional facility in Terrace would provide direct economic impacts over the next 20 years of approximately $862 million dollars assuming an annual inflation rate over that period of two (2%) percent. The support of the community for this type of facility would also ease the process and provide greater involvement with the inmate population and their families to improve the overall quality of life and outcomes.
NewsHawk: User: 420 Magazine - Cannabis Culture News & Reviews
Source: Terrace Standard
Author: Kat Lee
Copyright: 2010 Terrace Standard
Contact: Terrace Standard - Terrace Standard
Website: Terrace Standard - Terrace Standard
• Thanks to MedicalNeed for submitting this article
