HomeMy WebLinkAbout20101627 rctte0 CLERK TO THE BOARD
PHONE (970) 336-7215, Ext. 4226
FAX: (970) 352-0242
P. O BOX BOX 75858 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632
COLORADO
July 29, 2010
INLAND PPD HUDSON ASSOCIATES LLC
211 E 7TH STREET SUITE 1120
AUSTIN, TX 78701
RE: THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, 2010, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO - DENY
PETITIONER'S APPEAL AND AFFIRM ASSESSOR'S VALUE
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:ACCOUNT#: R6775763 PARCEL#: 130726201002-L2 SAND
HILLS INDUSTRIAL PARK
Dear Petitioner:
On July 28, 2010,the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado,convened,
and acting as the Board of Equalization, pursuant to Section 39-8-101, C.R.S., et.seq., considered
your petition of appeal of the County Assessor's valuation of your property described above,for the
year 2010.
The Board of Equalization found that the evidence presented at the hearing clearly
supported the value placed upon your above described property by the County Assessor. Such
evidence indicated the value was reasonable, equitable, and derived according to the
methodologies, percentages, figures and formulas dictated to the Weld County Assessor by law.
The assessment and valuation of the Weld County Assessor was affirmed as follows:
ACTUAL VALUE AS ACTUAL VALUE AS
DETERMINED BY SET BY BOARD
•
ASSESSOR
$61,914,792 $61,914,792
CC'.`C�9� PErOei/er) 2010-1627
/95- Ccurt/ley v- c7T4ek;E 7/ fae/e AS0076
INLAND PPD HUDSON ASSOCIATES LLC - R6775763
Page 2
A denial of a petition, in whole or in part, by the Board of Equalization may be appealed by
selecting one of the following three options; however, said appeal must be filed within 30 days of
the denial:
1. Board of Assessment Appeals: You have the right to appeal the County Board
of Equalization's (CBOE's)decision to the Board of Assessment Appeals (BAA).
Such hearing is the final hearing at which testimony, exhibits, or any other
evidence may be introduced. If the decision of the BAA is further appealed to
the Court of Appeals, only the record created at the BAA hearing shall be the
basis for the Court's decision. No new evidence can be introduced at the Court
of Appeals. (Section 39-8-108(10), C.R.S.)
Appeals to the BAA must be made on forms furnished by the BAA, and such
appeals should be mailed or delivered within thirty (30) days of denial by the
CBOE to:
Board of Assessment Appeals
1313 Sherman Street, Room 315
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: 303-866-5880
Fees: A taxpayer representing himself is not charged for the first two appeals to
the Board of Assessment Appeals; however,a taxpayer being represented by an
agent or an attorney must submit a fee of$101.25 per appeal.
OR
2. District Court: You have the right to appeal the CBOE's decision to the District
Court of the county wherein your property is located. New testimony,exhibits or
any other evidence may be introduced at the District Court hearing. For filing
requirements, please contact your attorney or the Clerk of the District Court.
Further appeal of the District Court's decision is made to the Court of Appeals for
a review of the record. (Section 39-8-108(1), C.R.S.)
OR
3. Binding Arbitration: You have the right to submit your case to arbitration. If
you choose this option the arbitrator's decision is final and your right to appeal
your current valuation ends. (Section 39-8-108.5, C.R.S.)
Selecting the Arbitrator: In order to pursue arbitration, you must notify the
CBOE of your intent. You and the CBOE select an arbitrator from the official list
of qualified people. If you cannot agree on an arbitrator,the District Court of the
county in which the property is located will make the selection.
Arbitration Hearing Procedure: Arbitration hearings are held within sixty days
from the date the arbitrator is selected. Both you and the CBOE are entitled to
participate. The hearings are informal. The arbitrator has the authority to issue
subpoenas for witnesses, books, records, documents and other evidence. He
2010-1627
AS0076
INLAND PPD HUDSON ASSOCIATES LLC - R6775763
Page 3
also has the power to administer oaths, and all questions of law and fact shall be
determined by him.
The arbitration hearing may be confidential and closed to the public, upon mutual
agreement. The arbitrator's written decision must be delivered to both parties
personally or by registered mail within ten (10) days of the hearing. Such
decision is final and not subject to review.
Fees and Expenses: The arbitrator's fees and expenses are agreed upon by
you and the CBOE. In the case of residential real property, such fees and
expenses cannot exceed$150.00 per case. The arbitrator's fees and expenses,
not including counsel fees, are to be paid as provided in the decision.
If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(970) 336-7215, Extension 4226.
Very truly yours,
Esther E. Gesick
Deputy Clerk to the Board
cc: Christopher Woodruff, Assessor
CORNELL CORRECTIONS OF CALIFORNIA
CORNELL COMPANIES INC - BRUCE BROWN
1700 W LOOP SUITE 1500
HOUSTON, TX 77027
2010-1627
AS0076
BOE SUMMARY SHEET
Account Number: R6775763 Parcel Number: 130726201002
INLAND PPD HUDSON ASSOCIATES LLC
211 E 7TH STREET SUITE 1120
AUSTIN, TX 78701
HEARING DATE: 7/28/2010, AT 2:30 PM
HEARING ATTENDED? 6N) NAME: Q j2&Le ��� ��
AGENT NAME
: CORNELL CORRECTIONS OF CALIFORNIA
ORNIA X4(1 `
CORNELL COMPANIES INC - BRUCE BROWN
1700 W LOOP SUITE 1500 ��� ✓r.
HOUSTON, TX 77027
APPRAISER NAME: CCJ � )t
DECISION
ACTUAL VALUATION
APPROVE BY SET BY
ASSESSOR BOARD
TOTAL ACTUAL VALUE 61,914,792 �/ 9r/ Val
/
COMMENTS:
MOTION BY .DL TO
SECONDED BY 4( Garcia --
Rademacher- )
Failed to prove appropriate value Conway- i
No comparables given Kirkmeyer-- N
Assessor's value upheld Long - (Y )
Other:
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-1627
M:\BOE\SUMMARY.dofx
Weld Count
CHRISTOPHER M. WOODRUFF COUNTY ASSESSOI
BRENDA DONES, DEPUTY ASSESSO
VALUATION REPORT
OF
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
FOR
County Board of Equalization
INLAND PPD HUDSON ASSOCIATES LLC
PETITIONER
vs.
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE
RESPONDENT
Parcel Number: 1307-26-2-01-002
Schedule Number: R6775763
Log Number: 2850
Date: 07/28/10
Time: 2:30 pm
Board: Board #
PREPARED BY
CHARLES JACK
Signature Date
Signature Date
ASSESSOR'S OFFICE STAFF APPRAISER
,20/0-- /6.27 CBOE_COMM_01i
Pa
SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Purpose of Appraisal To determine Market Value as of 1/1/10 based on an
appraisal date of 6/30/08.
Property Rights Appraised Unencumbered fee simple interest.
Location 3001 N JUNIPER ST
HUDSON
Land Area 2,211,736 Square Feet
Property Type Commercial
Correctional Facility
Year Built 2009
Quality Good
Class Masonry
Number of Stories 2
Improvement Sq. Ft. Four housing living units — 228,608 sq ft
Administration/medical/support — 54,308 sq ft
Gatehouse — 1,600 sq ft
Storage warehouse — 7,500 sq ft
Gymnasium — 8,000 sq ft
Total Area - 300,016 sq ft
Value Indications:
Land $2,211,737
Cost Approach $61,914,792
Market Approach n/a
Income Approach $65,156,118
Final Value $61 ,914,792
CBOE_COMM_O1i
Pa
_ '�•
l•Sr "
• r
•
:, - r
l
1 , , t .
-40
1
N...•
ti- �� _
•
03 / 23 / 2009
ri.i
H
F : G
•
E D
•
B -
; le 1
I •
• _ I - . - L �, SITE te'PLAN I
I •
03 / 23 / 2009
E_COMM_01 C
Pac
•
a
I L
lb I
= i
• _-.. - --- t .. ...
_ •.. .
. a - -
-
. III lit• Yf� •w wr• s - I 1 f ..
r,a.m.— _ , - 1 -- - -- — _- --
�-:: = / / / / / / - AL I ♦ t __ __
/ -/ / / ./e. / V / 1 -t 1- -Ni.-
_
. ._ - ua.>F•r.._ - - ^. .- _ �-----ogY•'.�+rei• . tJ' _ ���•. �� _ . _ _._ :=il Vie.. ,r.' r.�-
•
. -... 00150YOM. L....42 • ' - ..:,..-•irs,::"kCi;* . , • wto /1)9 / 200 .
. •• 4 4. .11. 1 •0 ' -
•
f.' Y a� lam /. .•.a% �i�,.• i t
fG i. Ir1 f ♦ ^.w jt' jt''1•4\z.r ar f• � `• _re•- ..r'• ',yetI�X i ••d r .y -tr.�T ;74_�s _ p? f rr' -`• 'RVlrrr.
aft att
eillia
Ifril ,.��
ape
Sr ...,.." 7 _
II
_ • - -
• -`. ' ._. iw •
- I\
k flit _-- - -,a _— _ .
I MN
';i4+tl�ll - ` - 9R K• l'.� ___ .: a: 1 . - y_ / i i •- � . '' • •A. - - -�
ii.4-...�f.'......�....•A 4.-�+mss L . '- -i.SB.1• .....a
- - 09 / 09 / 2009
: .. . .. . __
.•
. _ . .
, .
• _ . . .. .. .. :. _ _ ..
..... - it.r. •
•
r.
Sr
CBOE_COMM_01(
Pac
- - ,l -- - ,T - —
•
•
' r\ •
ILC I ' . c: .1-i 1 f- . l-tip fir,^ � r J .; i♦ - r f r
1 l
. rc"t 1 �, E•
t t
i
• !_-- Y --
- - - ---,r_— _—_ ?4L`S-�'.. Sri - _..
tom.ti
1
N.
- - 11 / 19 / 21,4 ,•
li
a
ma
diallial
srun
r-�• -[J Jt.✓�cf-._t' TTT ' -
'V'�.�.�n-fcl+,r^�-:r�i-� i:raw 1.--t —=.4 rr�..r.J Ftit MI iailli .
1• —.:,:—.7.2 r .3.-.1Tr - . aA t- 1 I.-.• {i / 1 Lr. . i
— _ — 'r— _ as-'— -
- L _ - _ - - _ ---_
• -
_,,.
' — ��-
_ A _.- _ - - .may.- •• • .•yrs_ •IM "!•� -=-/ al l'` "r ♦ •^• ! • Y N 1 . i d I, • •• 'v /!~f• 1r• •F ♦ I, , • -• ♦ � ' • . ♦
I
I •.••i - • - ..e.. ;' ♦ s, . -vier !J �F - y 1 , `, 1 • - M r • .• '� R. ' l.,•I •�•'•Ii�lr�7J ',7 �� t"'w • -•1 1/ ,yf • \ .1 c t, l r• r Hn I,�•1. ♦. , pct ` . -� t . ,. .* 1 �• Tt-
•
I I •• 1• 1 • I i -J 1 . { 1
+a•�(SY I ( 'T _ ,.tr 1,; ,r . L J ) Ar, �ltr •.. 1f a 1 l , ♦y- i :1 a._t - yew. -- • • - Lt.,, ,
r r"•.'LVT' • "17••••1-
y # r 1 ^tT�t s,•, .I.r.;� ` 1 F 1••F' '� Jr*" . '� - i• •�-..." 1, •• rte .. -"Pr• Y .
*/ ,tr ZC-�. *All
: - Jt•�+ . I • �•,..47:S.
%} ff It• • 1 >i pl,L *t y•'1_(c ♦ vin 1.1•;4.•4 ! : Y • e‘( 'w .
1.S 1 J v •t ,N • ',. I' 04 r4 �\ a ' • x a r.A.\'S t / I ` .t.
•
At "Yilr--,".44:4),•`,.
F y t ••
6)1.4 •- ..''4+IA. •t: • � 9 -t ^_. .. •4 4. 'id_ �'L•_ + •--•.. _ • —.•-• .. w .1�1•Is_•}'T 4f.' e -
CBOE_COMM_01 C
Pac
. #0.** 4# 4#4 4
,..-. ......- , ,, ,, -, r ' , V le 10 Alki. .4441.111,11"441k :I
4#
..!;.:V.t. .i..??1 :_.'- '. ` %\.' . . . • . . Sitper ,‘.. .. . . .. , . , _ ., , 4.4*
•�. .. mss..: � - ( - � \ -
'I:C71.1 le 7±,V;e71577:, i rtni".";.4 . i t 4#6, • 44 4. 4 444
4 474‘14%..,A . .
... .. tip",
-..---. /.4:-- -...., . .... . . " . ..
• , D, Ns"
4.4%.101,4411.111
At-, ....-..:. - ,:.-- I i C.P. i "‘. " :. . . - 4 6
•
141 t * Si 1 4,4.
ISII
, - i -. ' Si V 440.0)
./1 \44jit. . 4 ***** .4,0
In , *V ,,,
�‘ � rc� I. �4. ♦. 4
AL hal aseak
. . irarkS. A. a.. Ampt
•
•
4,4 _. , 11 / 19 / 2009
ti yam. `l. .j
-
ill y , ti
-�'
-4, iiiv
di in -.
VICE = _'a a Cri .. W'1i� HIM = =- w
_ ((�- . . 7},c rn-� -►s , .4--.:1 . ....mow-.__ _•• _• L.... �._....�... - i
' �� tip - - - - Ir
1 - • - 21.111 = - ! '� __ = =7 !
r -z -_-
- -s.=
. - 4.1414hOlitiv
•
�, / 9" • . 0
c -..-%.,_,
ikt ..
tirellsr-
CBOE_COMM01 C
Pac
001.14
r- _ a
i .jil __. 4 4-
I V at ...Alt..• _mot_ -
- - ''-�- ,� - - �. -..-.—.G17 a S- -1.::,� •-.{�__•.'_ - . .
. •v✓.�2.!- a.:• •ry;'lt !.,'I.e yv'i 1 .V..C.4 )i 7+ r11'.- _ ... I.
--- � .-
__ _ ._ _ . ,. -- •~1.111-,rte. _ -'- or _-�--
. -
illinni
08 / 28 / 2009
I I
. T
r
I r-----
It" •
4. - - -
wf� .l • ... - - . -
1 1 a;as_ .
111
4 .. .. , .
:. . _ .
. .
,4r1 ___ . ___ _ __
_ ___ ___
____ _ _______e
alls....a..... i. ,_ , ‘ IL_ _. ___._zs___...az==..a..__ . _
08 / 28 / 20 •
CBOE_COMM 010c
Pag(
- - i
a,
a
a
•t "'e .-.. r _ $:-: - -1�'r Y: : i1- :;. t . �.�
i
_ . _ .
7� fr
t fir.
I n i!Ism!" !Ir.! --- ..nmil•et__ f .t
la ino,,—,
I/
' -'ti
08 / 28 / 2009
\� = _,
s
MIEN all
CBOE_COMM_01 C
Pac
es
m
,r,,. ,i,X
\tic,.a
el
r t„..... ,
C E
1 kr
J 3 = J
'+ VI S
c 2 t4_ z i 5 tipW.
u _a i G r v
S Z ,Y Y
- lal : 4
N OAK 51.
er•
1 `i
i
Z - y m
. ra 'd
`-1
C i -'
j
a i 1 eg
41
a N JUN PER ST "
I
C c f
4.
te
V d
It
gyp'`"`
, i imenvi 1 I
ift. 'ir • ass_ ' /
•
V LJJ
te k i _ .7
[�va 'if •
. .. ,� N w Y/ .}
I
It
Y -
y
" r' _ - -
a
A :::::
- _ r
"'I.. . s..e5 i •i- L". '
a
- ' O r _ :'
CBOE_C0MM_01 C
Pac
COST APPROACH SUMMARY
The Assessor is currently using Marshall and Swift cost tables for the cost approach of commercial
properties in Weld County, which has been approved by the Division of Property Taxation to be
utilized by Colorado Assessors.
The structure has been classified properly utilizing the Marshall and Swift Valuation service and an
appropriate value assigned. A land value has likewise been established through the utilization of
vacant land sales of comparable properties.
Improvement Value $59,703,055
Land Value $2,211,737
TOTAL VALUE BY THE COST APPROACH
$61,914,792
CROE_COMM_01!
Page
COST APPROACH
LAND VALUE
Sales utilized to establish the value in the subject neighborhood are from 2007 and the first six
months of the 2008 market for the 2010 assessment date . The comparative sales approach is the
most reliable method of land valuation . Pursuant to 39- 104-( 10 . 2) (c) C . R . S . , the Assessor may
utilize sales from July 2003 through June 2008 to establish the proper value, if sufficient information
not available in the prior 18 months . Also , comparables outside the subject property area may be
used . The Weld County Assessor has an established ongoing sales confirmation and validation
program for property transactions used in developing value .
The land size of the subject is 2 ,211 , 736 square feet. Comparable commercial land sales indicated
value range of . 97 to $2 . 32 psf. For the subject property a value of $2 , 211 , 736 or $ 1 . 00 psf was
chosen to be applicable .
Parcel Number Sale Date Sale Price Land Size Per sq ft
Comparable 1 080725201001 04/17/07 $5 , 500 , 000 3, 169 , 707 $ 1 .74
Comparable 2 147120000022 02/20/07 $2 , 839 , 500 2 , 918 , 520 $0 . 97
Comparable 3 147303423001 06/07/07 $ 1 , 210 , 800 522 , 720 $2 . 32
ASSESSOR'S SUBJECT LAND VALUE
$2,211 ,737
CBOE_COMM_01C
Page
Cost Approach Summary Bldg B & C -Administration and support (Assessor bldg #1)
PARCEL NUMBER 1307-26-2-01-002
PROPERTY OWNER Inland PPD Hudson Associates LLC
ADRESS 3001 N Juniper St
CITY, STATE,ZIP Hudson, Co
DATE OF APPRAISAL 06/30/08
OCCUPANCY: Medium-security prison NUMBER OF STORIES 1
FLOOR AREA (SQ. FT.) 54,308 AVERAGE STORY HEIGH1 16
CLASS: Class C EFFECTIVE AGE 2009
COST RANK Very good ESTIMATED LIFE 45
HEATING AND COOLING Warm & Cool air zoned
UNITS COST TOTAL
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 54,308 $240.03 $13,035,545
Sprinklers PSF 54,308 $3.06 166,182
Total Basic Structure cost 54,308 $243.09 $13,201,73;
perimeter adjustment 1.00
wall height adjustment 1.092
Current multiplier 0.98
Local multiplier 0.99
Adjusted RCN Basic Cost $13,986,68E
EXTRAS: Sq Ft Cost PSF
Security fencing/Gates 3,410 $30.28 103,255
Asphalt Paving 25,837 $2.10 54,258
Razor wire 1,692 $0.84 1,421
TOTAL RCN $14,145,615
LESS DEPRECIATION
FUNCTIONAL 0.10 $1,414,562
TOTAL VALUE of Bldg B&C without land $12,731,051
Rounded Value $12,730,00
Value PSF $234.41
CBOE_COMM_01(
Page
Cost Approach Summary Bldg D -Housing Unit (Assessor bldg #2)
PARCEL NUMBER 1307-26-2-01-002
PROPERTY OWNER Inland PPD Hudson Associates LLC
ADRESS 3001 N Juniper St
CITY, STATE, ZIP Hudson, Co
DATE OF APPRAISAL 06/30/08
OCCUPANCY: Medium-security prison NUMBER OF STORIES 2
FLOOR AREA (SQ. FT.) 66,653 AVERAGE STORY HEIGH1 12
CLASS: Class C EFFECTIVE AGE 2009
COST RANK Very Good ESTIMATED LIFE 45
HEATING AND COOLING Warm & Cool air zoned
UNITS COST TOTAL
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 66,653 $240.03 $15,998,72(
Sprinklers PSF 66,653 $3.02 201,292
Total Basic Structure Cost 66,653 $243.09 $16,202,67£
perimeter adjustment 0.919
wall height adjustment 1.0
Current multiplier 0.98
Local multiplier 0.99
Adjusted RCN Basic Cost $14,446,531
EXTRAS: Sq Ft Cost PSF
Security fencing/Gates 3,410 $30.28 103,255
Asphalt Paving 25,837 $2.10 54,258
Razor wire 1,692 $0.84 1,421
TOTAL RCN $14,605,46E
LESS DEPRECIATION
FUNCTIONAL 0.10 $1,460,546
TOTAL VALUE of Bldg D without land $13,144,91E
Rounded Value $13,145,0C
Value PSF $197.2;
CBOE_COMM_)10
Page
Cost Approach Summary Bldg E -Housing Unit (Assessor bldg #3)
PARCEL NUMBER 1307-26-2-01-002
PROPERTY OWNER Inland PPD Hudson Associates LLC
ADRESS 3001 N Juniper St
CITY, STATE,ZIP Hudson, Co
DATE OF APPRAISAL 06/30/08
OCCUPANCY: Medium-security prison NUMBER OF STORIES 2
FLOOR AREA (SQ. FT.) 53,985 AVERAGE STORY HEIGH1 12
CLASS: Class C EFFECTIVE AGE 2009
COST RANK Very Good ESTIMATED LIFE 45
HEATING AND COOLING Warm & Cool air zoned
UNITS COST TOTAL
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 53,985 $240.03 $12,958,02C
Sprinklers PSF 53,985 $3.06 165,194
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 53,985 $243.09 $13,123,21'
perimeter adjustment 0.93
wall height adjustment 1.0
Current multiplier 0.98
Local multiplier 0.99
Adjusted RCN Basic Cost $11,866,35E
EXTRAS: Sq Ft Cost PSF
Security fencing/Gates 3,410 $30.28 103,255
Asphalt Paving 25,837 $2.10 54,258
Razor wire 1,692 $0.84 1,421
TOTAL RCN $12,025,29(
LESS DEPRECIATION
PHYSICAL 0.00 $0
FUNCTIONAL 0.10 $1,202,529
ECONOMICAL 0.00 $0
TOTAL VALUE of Bldg E without land $10,822,76'
Rounded Value $10,823,01
Value PSF $200.4
CBOE_COMM_OP
Pag(
Cost Approach Summary Bldg F - Housing Unit (Assessor bldg #4)
PARCEL NUMBER 1307-26-2-01-002
PROPERTY OWNER Inland PPD Hudson Associates LLC
ADRESS 3001 N Juniper St
CITY, STATE, ZIP Hudson, Co
DATE OF APPRAISAL 06/30/08
OCCUPANCY: Medium-security prison NUMBER OF STORIES 2
FLOOR AREA (SQ. FT.) 53,985 AVERAGE STORY HEIGH1 12
CLASS: Class C EFFECTIVE AGE 2009
COST RANK Very good ESTIMATED LIFE 45
HEATING AND COOLING Warm & Cool air zoned
UNITS COST TOTAL
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 53,985 $240.03 $12,958,02C
Sprinklers PSF 53,985 $3.06 165,194
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 53,985 $243.09 $13,123,214
perimeter adjustment 0.93
wall height adjustment 1.0
Current multiplier 0.98
Local multiplier 0.99
Adjusted RCN Basic Cost $11,866,35(
EXTRAS: Sq Ft Cost PSF
Security fencing/gates 3,410 $30.28 103,255
Asphalt Paving 25,837 $2.10 54,258
Razor wire 1,692 $0.84 1,421
TOTAL RCN $12,025,29(
LESS DEPRECIATION
PHYSICAL 0.00 $0
FUNCTIONAL 0.10 $1,202,529
ECONOMICAL 0.00 $0
TOTAL VALUE of Bldg F without land $10,822,76'
Rounded Value $10,823,01
Value PSF $200.4
CBOE_COMM_011
Pag(
Cost Approach Summary Bldg G - Housing Unit (Assessor bldg #5)
PARCEL NUMBER 1307-26-2-01-002
PROPERTY OWNER Inland PPD Hudson Associates LLC
ADRESS 3001 N Juniper St
CITY, STATE,ZIP Hudson, Co
DATE OF APPRAISAL 06/30/08
OCCUPANCY: Medium-security prison NUMBER OF STORIES 2
FLOOR AREA (SQ. FT.) 53,985 AVERAGE STORY HEIGH1 12
CLASS: Class C EFFECTIVE AGE 2009
COST RANK Very Good ESTIMATED LIFE 45
HEATING AND COOLING Warm & Cool air zoned
UNITS COST TOTAL
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 53,985 $240.03 $12,958,02(
Sprinklers PSF 53,985 $3.06 165,194
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 53,985 $243.09 $13,123,214
perimeter adjustment 0.932
wall height adjustment 1.0
Current multiplier 0.98
Local multiplier 0.99
Adjusted RCN Basic Cost $11 ,866,35(
EXTRAS: Sq Ft Cost PSF
Security fencing/gates 3,410 $30.28 103,255
Asphalt Paving 25,837 $2.10 54,258
Razor wire 1,692 $0.84 1,421
TOTAL RCN $12,025,29(
LESS DEPRECIATION
PHYSICAL 0.00 $0
FUNCTIONAL 0.10 $1,202,529
ECONOMICAL 0.00 $0
TOTAL VALUE of Bldg B&C without land $10,822,76'
Rounded Value $10,823,01
Value PSF $200.4
CBOE_COMM_O1
Page
Cost Approach Summary Gatehouse (Assessor bldg #6)
PARCEL NUMBER 1307-26-2-01-002
PROPERTY OWNER Inland PPD Hudson Associates LLC
ADRESS 3001 N Juniper St
CITY, STATE,ZIP Hudson, Co
DATE OF APPRAISAL 06/30/08
OCCUPANCY: Medium-security prison NUMBER OF STORIES 1
FLOOR AREA (SQ. FT.) 1,600 AVERAGE STORY HEIGH1 15
CLASS: Class C EFFECTIVE AGE 2009
COST RANK Good ESTIMATED LIFE 45
HEATING AND COOLING Warm & Cool air zoned
UNITS COST TOTAL
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 1,600 $93.05 $148,880
perimeter adjustment 1.105
wall height adjustment 1.069
Current multiplier 0.98
Local multiplier 0.99
Adjusted RCN Basic Cost $170,623
EXTRAS: Sq Ft Cost PSF
Canopy 1,600 $17.62 28,192
TOTAL RCN $198,815
LESS DEPRECIATION
PHYSICAL 0.00 $0
FUNCTIONAL 0.00 $0
ECONOMICAL 0.00 $0
TOTAL VALUE of Gatehouse without land $198,815
Rounded Value $198,800
Value PSF $124.2
CBOE_COMM_01
Pagi
Cost Approach Summary Storage Warehouse (Assessor bldg #7)
PARCEL NUMBER 1307-26-2-01-002
PROPERTY OWNER Inland PPD Hudson Associates LLC
ADRESS 3001 N Juniper St
CITY, STATE,ZIP Hudson, Co
DATE OF APPRAISAL 06/30/08
OCCUPANCY: Medium-security prison NUMBER OF STORIES 1
FLOOR AREA (SQ. FT.) 7,500 AVERAGE STORY HEIGH1 14
CLASS: Class S EFFECTIVE AGE 2009
COST RANK Good ESTIMATED LIFE 40
HEATING AND COOLING Electric
UNITS COST TOTAL
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 7,500 $48.25 $361,875
perimeter adjustment 1.040
wall height adjustment 1.000
Current multiplier 1.01
Local multiplier 0.97
Adjusted RCN Basic Cost $368,710
EXTRAS: Sq Ft Cost PSF
Loading Wells 1,120 $15.04 16,845
TOTAL RCN $385,555
LESS DEPRECIATION
PHYSICAL 0.00 $0
FUNCTIONAL 0.00 $0
ECONOMICAL 0.00 $0
TOTAL VALUE of storage warehouse without land $385,517
Rounded Value $385,5
Value PSF $51.4
CBOE_COMM_01
Pag
Cost Approach Summary Gymnasium (Assessor bldg #8)
PARCEL NUMBER 1307-26-2-01-002
PROPERTY OWNER Inland PPD Hudson Associates LLC
ADRESS 3001 N Juniper St
CITY, STATE, ZIP Hudson, Co
DATE OF APPRAISAL 06/30/08
OCCUPANCY: Medium-security prison NUMBER OF STORIES 1
FLOOR AREA (SQ. FT.) 8,000 AVERAGE STORY HEIGH1 24
CLASS: Class S EFFECTIVE AGE 2009
COST RANK Fair ESTIMATED LIFE 35
HEATING AND COOLING Forced air
UNITS COST TOTAL
RCN BASIC STRUCTURE COS' 8,000 $77.70 $621,600
perimeter adjustment 0.968
wall height adjustment 1.257
Current multiplier 1.04
Local multiplier 0.97
Adjusted RCN Basic Cost $763,004
EXTRAS: Sq Ft Cost PSF
Canopy 80 $17.62 1,410
Concrete slab 3,200 $3.10 9,920
TOTAL RCN $774,333
LESS DEPRECIATION
PHYSICAL 0.00 $0
FUNCTIONAL 0.00 $0
ECONOMICAL 0.00 $0
TOTAL VALUE of Gymnasium without land $774,755
Rounded Value $774,755
Value PSF $96.8
CBOE_COMM_0'
Pac
COST APPROACH SUMMARY
Less M & S
M & S Cost Functional RCNLD
Building Bldg type RCN Depr Rounded Sq Ft #of Beds Value ps
Administration &
Bldg B& C Support $14,145,619 $1,414,562 $12,730,000 54,308 $234.4
Bldg D Housing Unit $14,605,465 $1,460,546 $13,145,000 66,653 338 $197.2
Bldg E Housing Unit $12,025,290 $1,202,529 $10,823,000 53,985 304 $200.4
Bldg F Housing Unit $12,025,290 $1,202,529 $10,823,000 53,985 304 $200.4
Bldg G Housing Unit $12,025,290 $1,202,529 $10,823,000 53,985 304 $200.1
Bldg A Gatehouse $198,800 $198,800 1,600 $124.2
BldgJ Storage Warehouse $385,500 $385,500 7,500 $51.1
Bldg I Gymnasium $774,755 $774,755 8,000 $96/
Total Imps $59,703,055
Add Land $2,211,737
Total Value $61,914,792 300,016 1250 $206.:
Per Per
Subjects 1,188
1,250 total rentable
beds $49,532 beds $52,11;
CBOE_COMM 01
Pag
All permits for the Hudson Prison
Building Permit Value
B&C $10,700,000
p $14,888,000
E $11,072,000
F $11,072,000
G $11,072,000
Gatehouse $205,000
Stor Whse $763,000
Gym $604,000
Lighting/fence $1,016,000
Total permit value $61,392,000
Land $2,211,737
Grand Total $63,603,737
1,188 rentable beds $53,538
1, 250 total beds $50,883
300,016 sf $212.00
The cost to bring in the off-site infrastructure including water, sewer, natural gas, phone,and
electric from approximately 2.5 miles away cost an additional 15 to 20 million.
The actual construction costs to build the Hudson Prison were request by the Weld County
Assessor's Office on several occasions but have yet to be provided.
CBOE_COMM_0'
Pag
MARKET INCOME WORKSHEET
Parcel : 130726201002
Name : Inland PPD Hudson Associates
Address : Hudson Correctional Facility - Cornell Companies
3001 N Juniper Street, Hudson, Co
Bldg Sq Ft Use # of beds
(1188 beds +
300 ,016 Prison 1250 62 seg
Tax Rate Mill Rate Assm't Rate ETR
0 .083719 0 .29 0 .024278
Avg Rent PSF
Subject Rents Annual Gross
#of Beds Rent per bed # of days Income
# of beds 1 , 188 $54.00 365 $23,415,480
Vacancy 20% $4 ,683 ,096
EGI $18,732,384
Expenses
Industry Aver 60% $ 11 ,239 ,430
Net Income $7 ,492,954
Net Income/Overall Cap Rate = Property Value
Cap Rate + Eff Tax Rate 11 .500 0 . 115
Total Value
Estimated Property Value $65,156,118
Value per bed 1 , 188 beds $ 541845
Value PSF $ 217 . 18
CBOE_COMM_01 i
Page
CONCLUSION
Real property for tax year 2010 must be valued utilizing the level of value for the period of one and
one-half years immediately prior to July 1, 2008. Except that, if comparable valuation data is not
available from such one-and one-half-year period to adequately determine the level of value of a cla:
of property. The period of five years immediately prior to July 1, 2008 shall be utilized to determine
the level of value. Said level of value shall be adjusted to the final day of the data gathering period.
Changes occurring between base years are not to be accounted for until the following level of value i
implemented, other than additions, change in use, detrimental acts of nature, damage due to fire, etc
or creation of a condominium, or any new regulations restricting or increasing the use of the land, or
combination thereof. {39-1-104(11)(b)(1) C. R .S.}
The subject property has been classified as Commercial Property for assessment purposes.
Commercial property value shall be determined by appropriate consideration of the Cost Approach,
Market Approach, and Income Approach to value. {39-1-103(5)(a) C. R. S.} The Assessor has considers
all three approaches to value for the subject parcel on appeal.
FINAL RECONCILIATION
After consideration of the cost, market and income approaches, it is the Weld County Assessor's
opinion that the value of$61,914,792 , most accurately reflects the value of the subject property in
Weld County for the 2008 tax year.
COST APPROACH MARKET APPROACH INCOME APPROACH
$61,914,792 n/a $65,156,118
ASSESSOR'S VALUE
$61,914,792
CBOE_COMM_01(
Page
Bldg B & C
90'
509' O
205' 266'
Bldg C Q
Bldg C Area C Bldg C Area B Area A ko
10250.0 sf 13300.0 sf 7300.0 sf
599' Bldg B a
23457.5 sf 61.3'
Jail - Correctional Facility
Administration Bldg 164' 19.3'
Blt 2009 ",'\�
Class S Frame
Masonary Walls
80
Package-air
16' wh
Total Area 54,308.0 sf
Sketch by AIM h'edina"
CBOE_COMM_O
Pac
55'7' Bldg D
Jail Correctional Facility 24.3' office 24.3' i,'
Blt 2008 y rj
Class s N.-
'‘. %t•. es,
Red Iron support frame w/ block CF:'
Package air 6 1
16' wh y9` t(e'.• 7St-
1st Floor 47342.8 sf 4t Pod Pod
i s
100 cells Day Room Day Room
(9
28.3'
Pod Pod
7' 2 4
Day Room •., Day Room
153'
4t?, Pod ',.P ..sap.
Day Room
7' 2' 7' 116'
in _
r
- '' Seg.Rec. Yard ,c2
91'
Sketch by Apex Medina'"
CBOE_COMM_01
Pag
5.5./'
Jail - Correctional Facility 24.3' office 24.3'
Bit 2008 g df
Class S . %,,,,,.-' s-
Red Iron support frame w/ block ,' .
Package-air
16' wh �� gat`'/' / b
y ES,
Mezzanine / 2nd floor „.. Pod o Pod
19310.0 sf 1 " s
Day Room Day Room
100 cells ?.. ••„% 7'
ontro
28.3' Pod oa Pod m
2
7' qtr 2 N
Day Room 4
Day Room
__ _
04 153'
T ^ v'
S0 N Pod `:9.is,,o-
ai 3 C7
�js':, U Day Room a
2 +
7 2 7' 116' Cells
in _
7
Z --' Seg.Rec. Yard °'
91'
Sketch by Apex Medina,"
CBOE_COMM_01
Pagi
BLDGS E,F, & G
Jail - Correctioal Facility
Bldg E 24.3' 24.3' Blt 2008
at_iftw.- Offices Class S
it i Steel frame w/ concrete block
L\.- Package-air
25' wh
CP7/ CPi/ Pre-cast Concrete cells
1st Level 38935.6 sf
Ch. .ta ,:" Si d Mezzanine 15050.0 sf
',ye /d • °s S` Total Area
53,985.0 sf
Pod Pod
"••••••' •'.. 1 4
:'
28.3' ; Day Room
28.3'
C` `G¢ 7'
Pod Pod •4#4.
2 3 :
. a
76 cells mezzanine level
76 cells 1st level
:'G�
152 cells total
,6'8Z
Sketch by Apex MedinaTM
CBOE_COMM_01(
Page
BLDGS ES,& G
24.3' 24.3'
Mezzanine Floor Area Offices
1
Corridor area 1843.3 sf titi�' J?.
Cell area 10187.0 sf
Balcony 3,020.0 sf O, P.*..
d57
Total Mezzanine •ti, t dit `P4� 59.
15050.0 sf y,�o ed/e'� AIra s
n
O
28.3 --IOpen to Day Room Q Open to Day Room , 28.31
• 0
7
CPi�s Ge'
o,,
L
•e ure. •As , •• -e,
••"" +6 ..
• yr' oJ
-T. 'Y
,ssz
:h by Apex Medina^'
CBOE_COMM_O1i
Rag,
GATEHOUSE
80'
Entry Building
Storage Warehouse
Emergency Blt 2009 VistaSecuity
Armory Response Metal fr w/block Waiting Area Check 20'
Package-air
15' wh
1600.0 sf
Canopy
5 50.0 sf
10'
Sketch by Apex Medina"'
CBOE_COMM_070
Page
20'
a
E
56' ec �'
0) O
c
-DN
0 H
0 0
Storage Warehouse
Blt 2009
Class S 60'
Electric heat 14' wh
7500 .0 sf
125'
Sketch by Ppex Medina'm
C BOE_C0MM_01
Pag
100'
40'
Gym
Blt 2009
Steel fr w/ block
80 Forced Air Handball Courts
24' wh 3200.0 sf CO
8000.0 sf
72'
Office Maintenance Restrooms
v� in
8' 8'
40.0 sf 40.0 sf
Sketch by Apex Medina"'
CBOE_COMM_01
Pag
REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
Christopher M. Woodruff Date of Notice: 6/22/2010
Weld County Assessor Telephone: (970) 353-3845 or(720) 652-4255
1400 N 17th Ave Fax: (970) 304-6433
Greeley, CO 80631 E-mail: appeals@co.weld.co.us
www.co.weld.co.us Office Hours: 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM
SCHEDULE/ACCOUNT NO. TAX YEAR TAX AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION/
PHYSICAL LOCATION
R6775763 2010 2564 L2 SAND HILLS INDUSTRIAL PARK
3001 N JUNIPER ST
HUDSON,CO
INLAND PPD HUDSON ASSOCIATES LLC
3 211 E 7TH STREET SUITE 1120
AUSTIN,TX 78701
re
a
ASSESSOR'S VALUATION
ACTUAL VALUE PRIOR
PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION TO ACTUAL VALUE AFTER
REVIEW REVIEW
COMMERCIAL 61,914,792 61,914,792
TOTAL $61,914,792 $61,914,792
The Assessor has carefully studied all available information, giving particular attention to the
specifics included on your protest. The Assessor's determination of value after review is
based on the following:
LH02-No change has been made to the valuation of this property. Colorado law requires us to send
this notice of denial for all properties on which we do not adjust the value.
If you disagree with the Assessor's decision, you have the right to appeal to the
County Board of Equalization for further consideration, § 39-8-106(1)(a), C.R.S.
The deadline for filing real property appeals is July 15.
The deadline for filing personal property appeals is July 20.
The Assessor establishes property values. The local taxing authorities (county, school
district, city, fire protection, and other special districts) set mill levies. The mill levy
requested by each taxing authority is based on a projected budget and the property tax
revenue required to adequately fund the services it provides to its taxpayers. The local
taxing authorities hold budget hearings in the fall. If you are concerned about mill levies, we
recommend that you attend these budget hearings. Please refer to last year's tax bt;or ask
your Assessor for a listing of the local taxing authorities.
IT, i= o
Please refer to the reverse side of this notice for additional inforrl,ion r I=
fI R
r• ➢ 1--i
cf.)CORNELL CORRECTIONS OF CALIFORNIA -
CORNELL COMPANIES INC- BRUCE BROWN
1700 W LOOP SUITE 1500
HOUSTON TX 77027
2010-1627 15-OPT-AR
PR 207-08/08
NOD#.8938
APPEAL PROCEDURES
County Board of Equalization Hearings will be held from
July 1 through August 5 at
915 10th Street, Greeley, CO
To appeal the Assessor's decision, complete the Petition to the County Board of Equalization shown
below, and mail or deliver a copy of both sides of this form to:
WELD COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
915 10TH Street, P.O. Box 758
Greeley, Colorado 80632
Telephone(970) 356-4000 Ext, 4225
To preserve your appeal rights, your Petition to the County Board of Equalization must be
postmarked or delivered on or before July 15 for real property and on or before July 20 for
personal property— after such date, your right to appeal is lost. You may be required to prove that
you filed a timely appeal; therefore, we recommend that all correspondence be mailed with proof of
mailing.
You will be notified of the date and time scheduled for your hearing. The County Board of
Equalization must mail a written decision to you within five business days following the date of the
decision. The County Board of Equalization must conclude hearings and render decisions by August
5, § 39-8-107(2), C.R.S. If you do not receive a decision from the County Board of Equalization and
you wish to continue your appeal, you must file an appeal with the Board of Assessment Appeals by
September 11.
If you are dissatisfied with the County Board of Equalization's decision and you wish to continue your
appeal, you must appeal within 30 days of the date of the County Board's written decision to ONE of
the following:
Board of Assessment Appeals District Court
1313 Sherman Street, Room 315 9`"Avenue and 9`" Street, P.O. Box C
Denver, CO 80203 Greeley, Colorado 80632
(303) 866-5880 Telephone(970) 356-4000 Ext. 4520
www.dolacolorado.gov/baa
Binding Arbitration
For a list of arbitrators, contact the County Commissioners at the address listed for the County Board
of Equalization.
If the date for filing any report, schedule, claim, tax return, statement, remittance, or other document
falls upon a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, it shall be deemed to have been timely filed if filed on
the next business day, a{ 39-1-120(3), C.R.S.
PETITION TO COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
What is your estimate of the property's value as of June 30, 2008? (Your opinion of value in
terms of a specific dollar amount is required for real property pursuant to § 39-8-106(1.5), C.R.S.)
$ 3C -HO8441 TWA
What is the basis for your estimate of value or your reason for requesting a review? (Please
attach additional sheets as necessary and any supporting documentation, i.e., comparable sales, rent
roll, original installed cost, appraisal, etc.)
'1''e-r discussion cora, eoor-fvtcey o.+ cL{ve 04,ce o.' ( (
Too n{i c-krk , �(-1,e kea.ri n� �ror '-k S ,uat}er is scked'Vleot�'or
0V 3O PM Ott we&esd4..y, 3L) AZ; QO/
ATTESTATION
I, Ih- n er o er or agent' of the property identified above, affirm that the statements
ccnt:in>: her and any attachments hereto are true and complete.
713 a35�73sr - $ -.2G/O
Signature Telephone Number Date
/1 Attach letter of authorization signed by property owner.
15-OPT-AR
PR 207-08/08
NOD# 8938
Letter of Authorization for Property Tax Matters
I/We,the undersigned, as the owner of the property listed below located in Weld County, delegate the
agent listed below full authority to handle all matters relative to assessments and to represent me/us,
with the assistance of legal counsel if necessary, in the appeal process for taxyear 2010 .
Cornell Corrections of California, Inc.
Agent Name
All correspondence regarding my/our appeal of the value of the property listed below should be directed to:
Cornell Corrections of California, Inc. do Cornell Companies. Inc.
1700 W. Loop S., Suite 1500
Houston, TX 77027
Attn: Bruce Brown
Owner Information:
Property Owner Name Inland PPD Hudson Ass es L
Please Prl
Property Owner Signature C/4.0.v Te"1es (?)"-eS`
Date TiC O1S-; JP
Property Information(Please attach additional sheets as necessary)
1. Parcel#and/or Account# Parcel#: 130726201002 / Account#: R6775763
Property Address Lot 2, Sand Hills Industrial Park 3001 N.Juniper St., Hudson, CO 80642
2. Parcel#and/or Account#
Property Address
3. Parcel#and/or Account#
Property Address
4. Parcel#and/or Account#
Property Address
5. Parcel#and/or Account#
Property Address
Tonya Disney
From: Courtney Anaya
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 9:44 AM
To: Tonya Disney
Subject: RE: CBOE10MASTER.xls
Thanks!
Just FYI - I spoke with Bruce Brown with Cornell Company representing R6775763 (Inland PPD - Hudson
prison). I have tentatively scheduled a hearing on Wednesday, July 28th from 2:30 - 3:30 as he is flying in
from LA. He will be mailing NOD.
Thanks!
Courtney Anaya
Assistant Analyst
Weld County Assessor's Office
(970) 353-3845 ext. 3670
From: Tonya Disney
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 9:37 AM
To: Courtney Anaya
Subject: CBOE10MASTER.xls
Here is the updated list.
Thank you.
1
6 CLERK TO THE BOARD
rte:Se
PHONE (970) 356-4000 EXT 4226
FAX: (970) 352-0242
WEBSITE: www.co.weld.co.us
VII
915 10TH STREET
P.O. BOX 758
GREELEY, COLORADO 80632
C.
COLORADO
July 22, 2010
INLAND PPD HUDSON ASSOCIATES LLC
211 E 7TH STREET SUITE 1120
AUSTIN, TX 78701
Parcel No.: 130726201002 Account No.: R6775763
Dear Petitioner(s):
The Weld County Board of Equalization has set a date of July 28, 2010, at or about the hour of
2:30 PM, to hold a hearing on your valuation for assessment. This hearing will be held at the
Weld County Centennial Center, First Floor Hearing Room, 915 10th Street, Greeley,
Colorado.
You have a right to attend this hearing and present evidence in support of your petition. The
Weld County Assessor or his designee will be present. The Board will make its decision on the
basis of the record made at the aforementioned hearing, as well as your petition, so it would be
in your interest to have a representative present. If you plan to be represented by an agent or
an attorney at your hearing, prior to the hearing you shall provide, in writing to the Clerk to the
Board's Office, an authorization for the agent or attorney to represent you. If you do not choose
to attend this hearing, a decision will still be made by the Board by the close of business on
August 5, 2010, and mailed to you on or before August 10, 2010.
Because of the volume of cases before the Board of Equalization, all cases shall be limited to 15
minutes. Also due to volume, cases cannot be rescheduled. It is imperative that you provide
evidence to support your position. This may include evidence that similar homes in your area
are valued less than yours or you are being assessed on improvements you do not have.
Please note: The fact that your valuation has increased cannot be your sole basis of
appeal. Without documented evidence as indicated above, the Board will have no choice but
to deny your appeal.
•
If you wish to obtain the data supporting the Assessor's valuation of your property, please submit
a written request directly to the Assessor's Office by fax (970) 304-6433, or if you have
questions, call (970) 353-3845. Upon receipt of your written request, the Assessor will notify
you of the estimated cost of providing such information. Payment must be made prior to the
Assessor providing such information, at which time the Assessor will make the data available
within three (3) working days, subject to any confidentiality requirements.
2010-1627
AS0076
INLAND PPD HUDSON ASSOCIATES LLC - R6775763
Page 2
Please advise me if you decide not to keep your appointment as scheduled. If you need any
additional information, please call me at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
BOARD WAS,,,_
OF EQUALIZATION
�O )4,/.
Esther E. Gesick
Deputy Clerk to the Board
cc: Christopher Woodruff, Assessor
CORNELL CORRECTIONS OF CALIFORNIA
CORNELL COMPANIES INC - BRUCE BROWN
1700 W LOOP SUITE 1500
HOUSTON, TX 77027
2010-1627
AS0076
r
� } irk : NIL.
i
1-:
1-` REVISED APRIL 2010 ) -El W
; .-
i t CENTER ON THE STATES
Prison
Count
State Population Declines for the First Time in 38 Years
For the first time in nearly 40 years, the number of state the four decades since, the number of prisoners grew by
prisoners in the United States has declined. Survey data 705 percent." Adding local jail inmates to state and federal
compiled by the Public Safety Performance Project of prisoners, the Public Safety Performance Project calculated
the Pew Center on the States, in partnership with the in 2008 that the overall incarcerated population had
Association of State Correctional Administrators, indicate reached an all-time high, with 1 in 100 adults in the United
that as of January 1 , 2010, there were 1 ,404,053 persons States living behind bars.'
under the jurisdiction of state prison authorities, 4,777 (0.3
percent) fewer than there were on December 31 , 2008. FIRST STATE DECLINE IN 38 YEARS
This marks the first year-to-year drop in the state prison The number ut suit: inmates grew Nto uetween
population since 1972. 1972 and 2008 before dropping in 2009. Jan. 1, 2010:
1,404,503 prisoners
1.5 million —0.3%
In this period, however, the nation's total prison population
increased by 2,061 people because of a jump in the 1.2
number of inmates under the jurisdiction of the Federal
Bureau of Prisons. The federal count rose by 6,838 prisoners, 0.9
or 3.4 percent in 2009, to an all-time high of 208,118.
0.6
1972:
Prior to 1972, the number of prisoners had grown 03 1925: prisone
%
-1.5%
at a steady rate that closely tracked growth rates in 85,239 prisone . --�•
the general population. Between 1925 (the first year
0 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
national prison statistics were officially collected) and NOTE:Annual figures prior to 1977 reflect the total number of sentenced prisoners in state
custody. Beginning in 1977. all figures reflect the state jurisdictional population as reported
1972, the number of state prisoners increased from to the Bureau of Justice Statistics'"Prisoners" series. Data for both sentenced prisoners in
custody and the jurisdictional population are reported for 1977 to illustrate the transition.
85,239 to 174,379.'
Annual percent change in state prison populations
Starting in 1973, however, the prison population and +3%
imprisonment rates began to rise precipitously. This +2
change was fueled by stiffer sentencing and release laws +1
and decisions by courts and parole boards, which sent 0
a lin
more offenders to prison and kept them there for longer -0.3%
terms! In the nearly five decades between 1925 and
—1 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
1972, the prison population increased by 105 percent; in SOURCE: U.S. Department ofJustice.Bureau of Justice Statistics;Pew Center on the States,
Public Safety Performance Project
ci ! n then p. 2 h ; s. EXHIBIT
_. , . P'
F: Brief : •
State Trends Vary Widely In absolute numbers, California's state inmate count fell
the most, with the state shedding 4,257 prisoners in 2009.
While the overall state prison population has declined, This follows a decline of 612 prisoners in 2008. Five other
the Pew survey revealed great variation among the states experienced total reductions of more than 1 ,000
states. In 26 states, the population dropped, with some prisoners in 2009: Michigan (3,260), New York (1 ,699),
posting substantial reductions. Meanwhile, the number Maryland (1 ,315), Texas (1 ,257) and Mississippi (1 ,233).
of prisoners continued to grow in the other 24 states,
several with significant increases. Among those states where the prison population
increased, Indiana led the nation in proportional terms,
In proportional terms, the steepest decline occurred growing by 5.3 percent. Other states with significant
in Rhode Island, where the prison population tumbled increases were West Virginia (5.1 percent), Vermont
9.2 percent. Other states with substantial declines (5 percent), Pennsylvania (4.3 percent) and Alaska
included Michigan (6.7 percent), New Hampshire (3.8 percent). In the 23 states where the state prison
(6.0 percent), Maryland (5.6 percent) and Mississippi population grew, more than half of the increase occurred
(5.4 percent). Michigan's contraction follows a three in just five states: Pennsylvania (2,122), Florida (1 ,527),
percent drop during 2008. Indiana ( 1 ,496), Louisiana (1 ,399) and Alabama (1 ,053).
STATES MOVE IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS
Percent change in state prison populations, 2008-2009.
WA
+1.790 Largest increase NH
+2.3% MN
Indiana
MT .0% ME
—0.1% ND VT +1.4%
OR +5.0%-6
+1.7% `1 +1.6% MA
ID
r +1.590 SD WI NY -2.2%
WY +2.8% -1.1% -2.8% -1
—0.490 —6.796 RI
NV NE PA CT° —9.2%
+4.3% —4.6/o
—1.6% nr-
-0.7% IL IN OH NJ
CA
—0.2% CO —0.7% +5.3% —0.2% DE —2.3%
—2.5% 96 KS MOKy VA —4.2%
"� +1.2% +2.0% _ 15% MD
1.3%
—5.6% Largest
AZ x +0.5% NC+1.0% decrease
+2.4% NM +2�% All SC Rhode
+2.7%
GA
+3.1°w l —1.0% Island
'i
J r
x.47 ` —5.49b MS +1.6% Increases
® Larger (>3%)
AK t ❑ Smaller (0-3%)
+3.8%
: +3.6%
Decreases
FL O Smaller (0-3%)
+13%
HI ® Larger (>3%)
—1.1%
NOTE:Percent change is from December 31,2008 to January 1,2010 unless otherwise noted in the jurisdictional notes.
SOURCE: Pew Center on the States, Public Safety Performance Project
2 Public Safety Performance Project I Pew Center on the States
The tremendous variation among growth rates in that states began to realize they could effectively reduce
the states shines a bright light on the role that state their prison populations,and save public funds,without
policy plays in determining the size and cost of the sacrificing public safety.In the past few years,several
prison system. states,including those with the largest population
declines,have enacted reforms designed to get taxpayers
"tear 1s Driving tie Dec ine7 a better return on their public safety dollars:
As recently as 2006,states were anticipating faster California.One of the primary reasons for California's
growth in prison populations.A survey of state past prison growth has been its high rate of parole
projections that year forecast a five-year increase of revocations.12Over the past two years,the state has
162,725 inmates and a jump of 104,515 by year-end sought to cut the number of low-risk parolees returning
2009.°However,the actual increase was 38,332 fewer to prison for technical violations by expanding use of
than projected.' intermediate sanctions to hold violators accountable
without a costly return to prison.13 Despite the significant
What happened?Conventional wisdom holds that
overall population decline during 2009,California's
states are facing such large budget deficits that they are problems with prison overcrowding remain far from
simply shedding inmates in a rush to save money.While resolved.In August 2009,a federal court ordered the
the fiscal crisis certainly has prompted many states to state to cut its prison population by more than 40,000
revisit their sentencing and release policies,financial prisoners,or about 30 percent,in two years.'The state is
pressures alone do not explain the decline in state struggling to develop a plan to meet this requirement.
prison populations.
Michigan.In March 2007,Michigan's prison population
The number of inmates in prison is determined by the reached an all-time high of 51,554.''Less than three
flow of admissions and releases.Indeed,total state years later,the state has reduced its population by
admissions to prison declined in 2007,well before the more than 6,000 inmates to 45,478.This reduction has
economic collapse,and again in 2008YThe admissions come about largely by reducing the number of inmates
decline was driven exclusively by a reduction in the who serve more than 100%of their minimum sentence,
number of people sent to prison for new crimes,as the decreasing parole revocation rates,and enhanced
other type of admission,those for violations of probation reentry planning and supervision through the Michigan
or parole,increased for the fifth year in a row."On the Prisoner Reentry Initiative.'E
release side of the equation,the number of inmates
released from state prison grew for the seventh year in Texas. In January 2007,Texas faced a projected prison
a row in 2008 and reached an all-time high of683,706." population increase of up to 17,000 inmates in just
Taken together,the rate of state prison growth began to five years."Rather than spend nearly 52 billion on new
slow in 2007,dropping from 2.8 percent in 2006 to 1.5 prison construction and operations to accommodate
percent in 2007,and then to 0.7 percent in 2008 before this growth, policy makers reinvested a fraction of this
declining 0.3 percent in 2009." amount-5241 million—in a network of residential
and community-based treatment and diversion
Admissions began to decline and releases started to rise programs.'8This strategy has greatly expanded
for a variety of reasons,but an important contributor is sentencing options for new offenses and sanctioning
Prison Count 2010: State Population Declines for the First Time in 38 Years $
options for probation violators.Texas also increased In addition to changes in policy and practice at the state
its parole grant rate and shortened probation terms. level,trends in crime and other demographic changes
As a result,this strong law-and-order state not only are potential contributing factors to the prison decline. In
prevented the large projected population increase 2008,the index crime rate was 763 serious offenses per
but reduced its prison population over the three years 100,000 persons.)6That figure is 13 percent lower than in
since the reforms were passed.''' 1972,the last year in which the state prison population
declined,and 37 percent lower than the historic high of
Ytissssippl.In 2008,Mississippi rolled back to 25 2
7 990. Indeed,the nation's crime rate has been declining
percent,from 85 percent,the portion of sentences steadily since the early 1990s,but the prison population
that nonviolent offenders are required to serve prior has not reflected this trend.If the crime trend was an
to parole eligibility."Between July 2008,when the explanatory factor for this year's state prison decline,why
law took effect,and August 2009,Mississippi paroled were the results not apparent until nearly 20 years after
3,076 inmates a median of 13 months sooner than the beginning of the crime drop?
they would have under the 85 percent law,which
was passed in 1995.'Through August 2009,only 121 One possible explanation for this delayed effect lies in
of those paroled offenders have been returned to the expanding population of people on community
custody-116 for technical violations of parole and supervision.Currently,more than five million offenders
five for nonviolent offenses 22 This initial recidivism are on probation or parole,an increase of 59 percent
rate of 0.2%(return for a new offense)in the first year since 1990.28 During the 1990s,admissions to prison
is a fraction of the national rate of 10.4%.3 Officials for new crimes were growing by less than one percent
attribute the low recidivism rate to the use of a new risk a year(potentially a reflection of declining crime),
assessment tool,which is helping distinguish between while admissions for violations of parole rose by four
inmates who can be safely paroled and those who need percent a year.'During that decade,parole violations,
to remain behind bars. as a proportion of all prison admissions,more than
doubled.'°Because parolees and probationers are subject
<e.aca.Three years ago,Nevada projected a prison to revocation to prison for violating the terms of their
population increase of more than 60 percent by 2012 supervision,they are more likely to return to prison than
at an estimated cost to taxpayers of more than $2 people from the general population are likely to enter
billion.^The 2007 legislature voted nearly unanimously prison,It may be that the growing parole and probation
to enact several policy measures that increased program population,and the recycling of these offenders back into
credits awarded for in-prison education,vocational and prison for violations,kept the prison population increasing
substance abuse treatment;expanded the number of during a time when crime declined.It is only during
credits people in prison and on community supervision recent years,as new court commitments(admissions to
can earn for"good time'and compliance with conditions, prison for new crimes) have decreased and the growth
respectively;and reinstated an advisory commission in revocations has stabilized,that the number of prison
to review sentencing and corrections policies for inmates has dropped.
effectiveness and efficiency.The combination of these
measures and other reforms saved Nevada$38 million in Changes in the general population can also affect the size
operating expenditures by FY 2009 and helped avert$1.2 and make-up of the prison population.Research shows
billion in prison construction costs. ' that criminal offending peaks in late adolescence and then
4 Public Safety Performance Project I Pew Center on the States
declines throughout adulthood." As baby boomers
age and the general population becomes older,crime PRISON COUNT DROPS IN 26 STATES
rates can be expected to decrease as well.
p change n rirahe anion pop gia i1JUb ggrU9.
eJ.erai Growth Continues -4,257 California
—3,260—Michigan
—1,699 New York
The federal prison population has grown at a far —1,315 Maryland
faster rate than has the state prison population,more —1,257 Texas
—1,233 Mississippi
than doubling since 199532 Despite the decline in —945 Connecticut
the state prison population in 2009,the number of -802 MN New Jersey
—479 I.Colorado
prisoners under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau —371 S Rhode Island
of Prisons continued to increase rapidly,rising to —313■Illinois
—300 In Delaware
208,118.On balance,the federal system has tougher —290■Kentucky
sentencing laws,more restrictive supervision policies —281 II Iowa
—268■Wisconsin
and fewer opportunities for diversion of defendants. —252■Massachusetts
All of these factors are likely contributing to the —235
I South Carolina
—220404■Nevada
continued increase in the number of prisoners in the —195 •Virginia
federal system.More specifically,expanding federal —773 New Hampshire
—80 f Ohio
jurisdiction over certain offenses and increased —64 I Hawaii
prosecutions of immigration offenses help explain the —30 Nebraska
—11 Utah
divergence in trends between most states and the .vn. —9 Wyoming
federal system.Prior to 1994 there were relatively few STATES WITH DECREASES —2 Montana
STATES WITH INCREASES Maine +31
immigration cases sentenced in federal courts,but North Dakota I+34
in 2008 they accounted for 28.2 percent of all federal South Dakota 1+92
Kansas 1+102
sentences,more than 21,000 individuals." Vermont 1+105
Idaho 1+110
t Tennessee +145
�,.' I,
, i the Deci ne Continue ? Minnesota 1+154
New Mexico +176
Alaska ■+190
After nearly four decades of uninterrupted growth,an Oregon ■+237
Washington II+307
annual drop in the state prison population is worthy
West Virginia ■+306
of note, no matter the scale of decline.However,it North Carolina ®+389
Arkansas +455
Oklahoma too soon to say whether the 2009 decline will be m xma -+533
a temporary blip or the beginning of a sustained Missouri MN+606
Georgia +843
downward trend.
Arizona +934
Alabama +1,053
It is possible that this narrow decline is simply seasonal Louisiana +1,399
Indiana +1,496
and may adjust upward in the first half of 2010.The Florida +1,527
Pennsylvania +2,122
nation's prison population can experience seasonal
patterns,with growth tending to be clustered in the NOTE change la from December 31.2008 toJanuary 1,2010 unless
otherwise noted in the jurisdictional notes.
first half of the calendar year.'°The decline in 2009 SOURCE Pew Center on the States,Public Safety Performance Project
Prison Count 2010:State Population Declines for the First Time in 38 Years 5
could be part of a seasonal downward adjustment and said they preferred"a mandatory intensive treatment
an increase in the first six months of 2010 could eliminate program as an alternative to prison;"a level of support
the 4,777-person drop.With a decline this narrow,when that went up to 83 percent when respondents were
the population is measured may affect the outcome. told the diversion of lower-level offenders could help
avert Si billion in new prison costs."
However,there are reasons to suspect that the decline
in 2009 could be a harbinger of a prolonged pattern. Increasing focus on cost-benefit analysis.Across all
Since the start of the nation's prison expansion,the areas of government, policy makers are demanding
landscape of sentencing and corrections policy has to know what results programs are producing,not
changed dramatically on several fronts: just what funding levels are or how many people are
being served.
Advances in supervision technology.Global Positioning
System(GPS)monitors,rapid-result drug tests and ATM- Budget pressure.Corrections costs have quadrupled
like reporting kiosks offer authorities new technologies in just the past 20 years,and now account for 1 of
to monitor the whereabouts and activities of offenders in every 15 state general fund discretionary dollars.3'
the community.These capabilities are giving lawmakers, Corrections has been the second fastest-growing
judges and prosecutors greater confidence that they can category of state budgets,behind only Medicaid,
protect public safety and hold offenders accountable and nearly 90 percent of that spending has gone to
with sanctions other than prison. prisons."
Advances in the science of behavior change.Research This is a drastically different policy environment than
has identified several strategies that can make significant the one that existed in the 1970s and 1980s,when
dents in recidivism rates,including cognitive-behavioral states decided that building more and more prison
therapy,motivational interviewing and the use of swift cells was the answer to crime,and it helps explain why
and certain but proportional sanctions for violations of more than half of the states have seen a reduction in
the rules of probation and parole. the size of their prison population.No matter what
happens in the short term,with more than 1.6 million
Development of more accurate risk assessments. people currently in state and federal prisons and more
Analyses of huge volumes of data have helped isolate than 700,000 additional people in local jails,"the United
the specific factors that predict criminal behavior, States will continue to lead the world in incarceration
such as antisocial values and thinking patterns.While for the foreseeable future."
no risk assessment tools are foolproof,today's"third
generation"tools do a good job of distinguishing high-,
medium-and low-risk offenders and of pointing the
Li/Lind/eaway toward case management plans that will cut the ire ,2i/o6. 7rrJr/i�7prr Sir/rn
chances of re-offense. - PC 1'rr�hrr ',CAS a, hr°ip,au>r,
,o-inunr hsrnlh .�runa[, (l<ucr-, //V,'n pr)11; irr
Polls show support for prison alternatives.The public .nnfroanvi,•r'rbi,;vt/r Au/Jig rumr'urrrri,iiu
is supportive of using community corrections rather a/C�r i,r„rri, / 1,irhti; au'� n, hR uth'Inldn
than prison for nonviolent offenders.In a 2007 voter ,, / /)( /h/,. n7(,,'(rr!t> ,',5/]
poll,for example,71 percent of Texas respondents
6 Public Safety Performance Project I Pew Center on the States
STATE AND FEDERAL PRISON COUNTS
Dec.31, :an.1. - °u Dec 31, Ban.1, n '5,
State 2008 2010 Change Change State 2008 2010 Change Change
Alabama 30,508 31,561 +1,053 +3.5% Nevada 12,743 12,539 -204 -1.6%
Alaska 5,014 5,204 +190 +3.8% New Hampshire 2,904 2,731 -173 -6.0%
Arizona 39,589 40,523 +934 +2 4% New Jersey 25,953 25,351 -602 -2.3%
Arkansas 14,716 15,171 +455 +3.1% New Mexico 6,402 6,578 +176 +27%
California 173,670 169,413 -4,257 -2.5% New York 60,347 58,648 -1,699 -2.8%
Colorado 23,274 22,795 -479 -2.1% North Carolina 39,482 39,871 +389 +1 0%
Connecticut 20,661 19,716 -945 -4.6% North Dakota 1,452 1,486 +34 +2.3%
Delaware 7,075 6,775 -300 -4.2% Ohio 51,686 51,606 -80 -0.2%
Florida 102,388 103,915 +1,527 +15% Oklahoma 25,864 26,397 +533 +2.1%
Georgia 52,719 53,562 +843 +1.6% Oregon 14,167 14,404 +237 +1.7%
Hawaii 5,955 5,891 -64 -1.1% Pennsylvania 49,307 51,429 +2,122 +43%
Idaho 7,290 7,400 +110 +15% Rhode Island 4,045 3,674 -371 -9.2%
Illinois 45,474 45,161 -313 -0.7% South Carolina 24,326 24,091 -235 -1.0%
Indiana 28,322 29,818 +1,496 +5.3% South Dakota 3,342 3,434 +92 +2.8%
Iowa 8,766 8,485 -281 -3.2% Tennessee 27,228 27,373 +145 +0.5%
Kansas 8,539 8,641 +102 +1 2% Texas 172,506 171,249 -1,257 -0.7%
Kentucky 21,706 21,416 -290 -1.3% Utah 6,546 6,535 -11 -0.2%
Louisiana 38,381 39,780 +1,399 +36% Vermont 2,116 2,221 +105 +50%
Maine 2,195 2.226 +31 +1.4% Virginia 38,276 38,081 -195 -0.5%
Maryland 23,324 22,009 -1,315 -5.6% Washington 17,926 18,233 +307 +17%
Massachusetts 11,408 11,156 -252 -2.2% West Virginia 6,059 6,367 +308 +5 1%
Michigan 48,738 45,478 -3,260 -6.7% Wisconsin 23,380 23,112 -268 -1.1%
Minnesota 9,910 10,064 +154 +16% Wyoming 2,084 2,075 -9 -0.4%
Mississippi 22,754 21,521 -1,233 -5.4%
- - -- • - - State total 1,408,830 1,404,053 -4,777 -0.3%
Missouri 30,186 30,792 +606 +20% - - - -- -
Federal(BOP) 201,280 208,118 +6,838 +34%
Montana 3,607 3,605 -2 -0.1% -' - - -- - - -! - -
Nebraska 4,520 4,490 -30 -0.7% National total I 1,610,110 1,612,071 2,061 +0.1%
Noce:Percent orange is from December 31.2008 to lanua ty 1,2010 u 'ess otherwise noted n the Jur A coon al notes at tees of this brief
SOU BCE'.December 31.2008 count is Iton'Pi»ners In 200$and reflects Bureau of Just ce Stamm tics lur sd,clonall count January I.2010 if Public Safety Performance Protecqursdcfonal roan'..
Prison Count 2010: State Population Declines for the FirstTme in 38Years 7
Endnotes
2010 figures compiled by the Pew Center on the States in 21 JEA Institute,"Reforming Mississippi's Prison System,"Public Safety
partnership with the Association of State Correctional Administrators. Performance Project,Pew Center on the States,The Pew Charitable
2008 figures are from the U.S.Department of Justice,Bureau of trusts(2009),http>/www_pewcenteronthestatesorg/uploadedFiles/
Justice Statistics.See'Jurisdictional Notes"for details. wwwpewcenteronthestatesorg/Initiatives/PSPP/MDOCPaper.
Pdf?n=8407_
2 Patrick A.Langan,John V.Fundis and Lawrence A.Greenfeld,
"Historical Statistics on Prisoners in State and Federal Institutions, 22 Ibid.
Yearend 1925-86,"U.S.Department of Justice,Bureau of Justice 23 Langan,Dr.Patrick A.,and Dr.David J.Levin,'Recidivism of
Statistics,(1988),15. Prisoners Released in 1994,'U.S.Department ofJustice,Bureau of
3 Alfred Blumstein and Allen J.Beck,'Reentry as a Transient State Justice Statistics(2002),httplibis.ojp.usd0j.gov/content/pub/pdf/
Between Liberty and Recomittment"In Jeremy Travis and Christy rpr94.pdf.
Visher(Eds.),Prisoner Reentry and Crime in America(Cambridge,UK: 24 Public Safety Performance Project.'Work in the States:Nevada,"
Cambridge University Press,2005),50-79. Pew Center on the States,The Pew Charitable Trusts(2008).http✓/
4 Langan,Fundis and Greenfeld,"Historical Statistics on Prisoners in www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Nevada(1).pdf.
State and Federal Institutions,Yearend 1925-8Q'U.S.Department of 25 Council of State Governments,Nevada Justice Reinvestment Brief,
Justice,Bureau of Justice Statistics. [forthcoming].
S Public Safety Performance Project,One in 100:Behind Bars In America 26 Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics Online,httpJwww.albany.
2008,Pew Center on the States,The Pew Charitable Trusts(2008), edu/sourcebook/pdf/t422008.pdf.
http//www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedPiles/8015PCTS_ 27 Ibid.
Prison08_FINAL_2-1-1_FORWEB.pdf.
28 Lauren E.Glaze and Thomas P.Bonczar,"Probation and Parole in
6 State projections were reported in Public Safety,Public Spending:
the United States,2008,"U.S.Department ofJustice,Bureau of Justice
Forecasting America's Prison Population,2007-2011,Public Safety
Performance Project,Pew Center on the States,The Pew Charitable Statistics(2009),http//bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/contenVpub/pdf/ppuse8.pdf.
Trusts(2007),http!/www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/ Public Safety Performance Project,One in 31:The Long Reach of
Public%2oSafety%20Public%20Spending.pdf_ American Corrections,Pew Center on the States,The Pew Charitable
lrusts(2009),htp>/www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/
7 Ibid. PSPP_I in3l_report_FINAL_W EB_3-26-09.pdf.
8 William J.Sabol,Heather C.West and Matthew Cooper,"Prisoners in 29 Timothy A.Hughes,Doris James Wilson and Allen J.Beck,"1-rends in
2008,'U.S.Departmentof Justice,bureau of Justice Statistics(2009),16, State Parole,1990-2000,"U.S.Department of Justice,Bureau of Justice
hap',//bjs.ojp-usdoj.gov/contenVpub/pdf/pOB.pdf. Statistics(2001),13,httplitfis.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/tsp00.
9 Ibid. pdf.
10 Ibid. 30 Ibid.
11 U.S.Department ofJustice,Bureau ofJustice Statistics 31 Alex R.Piquero,David P.Farrington and Alfred Blumstein,Key Issues
12 Joan Petersilia,"Research Supports the Parole Violation Decision in Criminal Career Research:New Analyses of the Cambridge Srudy in
Making Instrument"httpi/www.cdecca.gov/PVDMI/support_4_PVDMI. Delinquent Development(Cambridge,UK:Cambridge University Press,
html. 2007),143-149.
13 California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation,'Why 32 Christopher J.Mumola and Allen J.Beck,"Prisoners in 1996,"U.S.
CDCR developed a Parole Violation Decision Making Instrument Department ofJustice,Bureau of Justice Statistics(1997),3,http://bis.
(PVDMI),"http//www_cdcr.ca.gov/PVDMI/. ojp.usdoj gov/content/pub/pdf/p96.pdf.
14 Coleman v Schworzenegger,2009 WL 2430820(N D.Cal and E D.Cal. 33 United States Sentencing Commission,20085ourcebook of Federal
August 4,2009). Sentencing Statistics(2009),http>/www.ussc.gov/ANNRPT/2008/FigA.
pdf.
15 Michigan Department of Corrections,"FY 2011 Budget Proposal
and Updated Prison Bed Space Projections Trends in Key Indicators 34 William J.Sabol and Heather Couture,"Prison Inmates at Midyear
and Impact from Proposed Legislative Changes"(presentation to the 2007,"U.S.Department of Justice,Bureau of Justice Statistics(2008),
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Judiciary&Corrections, http?/bjsojp-usdoj.gov/contenVpub/pdf/pim07.pdf.
February 16,2010,Lansing,Michigan. 35 Baselice&Associates,Texas Voter survey#07090,April 1-4,
161bid- _ 2007(1,000 registered Texas votes,margin of error+3196,level of
confidence 95%).
17 Council of State Governments,"Justice Reinvestment in Texas: Texas Center for Public Policy Research,80th Legislative Session
Assessing the Impact of the 2007 Justice Reinvestment Initiative"
Survey,April 5-70,2007(602 registered Texas voters,margin of error
(2009),http>/www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/TX_
-399%,level of confidence 95'S5).
Impact_Assessment_April_2009(4).pdf.
36 Public Safety Performance Project,One in 31
18 Ibid.
37 Ibid.
19 U.S.Department of Justice,Bureau of Justice Statistics:Public
Safety Performance Project,Pew Center on the States,The Pew 38 Ibid.
Charitable Trusts. 39 International Centre for Prison Studies,'World Prison Brief,"Kings
20 Miss.Code Ann.§5 47-7-3,47-5-138 and§47-5-139(June 30,1995) College,London,http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/
and Miss.Code Ann.§47-7-3(April 7,2008). worldbrief/wpb_stats.php?area=all&category=wb_poptotal_
8 Public Safety Performance Project I Pew Center on the States
scic Iona Notes
Unless noted below,the state prisoner counts used in this brief for January 1,2010 were reported to the Association
of State Correctional Administrators(ASCA)by each state's Department of Corrections(DOC)in a survey conducted
for the Public Safety Performance Project(PSPP)of the Pew Center on the States.Prisoner counts reflect the total
standing population under the jurisdiction of the DOC.Unless otherwise noted,state prisoner counts for December
31,2008 were taken from Appendix Table 2 of the Department of Justice,Bureau of Justice Statistics'(BJS)"Prisoners in
2008"report.Additional follow-up confirmed that the ASCA/PSPP count for January 1,2010 was made using the same
methods as the BJS year-end 2008 count.
'H3urisdiction Notes
Federal(BOP) 1/1/2010 count is fromDecember 2009.
Georgia Prisoner counts reflect custody population.
Hawaii 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.
Kansas 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.
Idaho Prisoner counts include out-of-state inmates held in Idaho.
Indiana Prisoner counts include juvenile populations.
Maryland 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.
Massachusetts 1/1/2010 prisoner count excludes out-of-state,federal,and U.S.Marshall inmates.
Minnesota 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 7/1/2009.12/31/2008 count was adjusted,per DOC instruction,
due to improper counting methods.
Nebraska Prisoner counts reflect custody population.
Nevada 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 1/5/2010.
North Dakota 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.Prisoner counts exclude out-of-state and federal inmates.
Oklahoma 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.Prisoner counts do not include inmates in early
release programs.
Pennsylvania 12/31/2008 prisoner count was adjusted,per DOC instruction,because inmates held in private facilities,
local jails,federal facilities,and other states were erroneously double counted.
Rhode Island 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009
Texas 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 12/31/2009.
Virginia 1/1/2010 prisoner count is from 1/6/2010.
Prison Count 2010: State Population Declines for the FirstTime in 38 Years 9
1Hk
_w ee
>, \‘ CENTER ON THE STATES
The Pew Center on the States is a division of The Pew Charitable Trusts that
identifies and advances effective solutions to critical issues facing stint s_
Pew is 3 nonpiof7t organization that applies a rigorous, analytical approach
to improve public policy. inform the public and stimulate civic life.
www.pewcenteronthestates.org
Page 1 of 4
Newsweek
How The Recession Hurts Private Prisons
America's constantly booming prison population has seemed like a
good business to be in, but even that is slowing with the economy.
by Nancy CookJune 30, 2010
{'a _ S ' ' � �,.
v
rz. , .
��4, i
ii
W
t st/Nm� „ s
p. �R
- N` , "nX41', _..
Al Goldis /AP
A 2005 image of the inside of the privately run Michigan Youth Correctional Facility, in Baldwin,
Mich. The prison has since been closed
Baldwin, Mich., (population 1 ,107), will soon have more prison beds than full-time residents.
On the outskirts of town, one of the country's largest private prison companies recently spent
$60 million to expand a former juvenile prison into a 1,755-bed facility meant to house illegal
immigrants before deportation. This is the same town where every summer locals gather for a
carnival nicknamed Troutarama at which teenage girls vie for the crown of Ms. Lake County.
Thirty-two percent of Baldwin's families live below the poverty line, in a state with a 13.6
percent unemployment rate, compared to the national unemployment rate of 9.7 percent.
Baldwin residents were counting on the private prison to create jobs, but this past March, the
federal government pulled back its funding on the bid. This left the Geo Group, Inc., with an
empty fortress in the middle of rural Michigan, 85 miles north of Grand Rapids.
I A
a_ t
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/06/30/how-the-recession-hurts-private-prisons.print.html 7/1/2010
Page 2 of 4
NATIONAL PRISON POPULATION
From 1987 to 2007,the national prison population tripled
851
198/ 2007
A similar scenario is playing out across the country, in states such as California, Oklahoma,
and Colorado, where entire private prisons now sit vacant. The Huerfano County Correctional
Facility in Colorado and the Diamondback Correctional Facility in Oklahoma temporarily shut
their doors this spring after the state of Arizona stopped sending prisoners out of state in an
effort to save money. Cornell Companies, one of the three largest private prison operators in
the U.S., expects two of its California prisons to remain empty through 2010, while 11,600 of
Correction Corporation of America's beds were unoccupied as of early May. The empty
prisons are not a result of the number of inmates dropping. In fact, according to the Pew Public
Safety Performance Project, the number of inmates rose in 2007 in Arizona, Ohio, Kentucky,
Mississippi, and Florida. Instead, the empty beds are because state corrections agencies are
crowding prisoners into more facilities as they do in California, or trying to change legislation to
make sentencing less harsh for nonviolent criminals. The private prison industry's reliable mix
of housing state and federal inmates and illegal immigrants—a model that helped to fuel two
decades of growth—is no longer a surefire way to get rich. "There are only so many places you
can find people," says Martin F. Horn, a former commissioner with the New York City
Department of Correction and a lecturer at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
Though it's certainly not disappearing and there are signs of a potential recovery for the sector,
the private corrections business is under financial pressure to change its business plan, and as
that happens, prison advocates worry that the industry and it's bottom-line approach will come
to dominate other areas of the justice system. Rather than worrying about upping the number
of inmates, private prison companies are tapping into overseas markets and offering a wider
range of services. GEO increased its revenue by $20.2 million in the last year by opening up
prisons in Australia and the United Kingdom, while also eyeing contracts in South Africa and
New Zealand. Cornell runs halfway houses and youth prisons and has noticed an uptick in the
demand for drug treatment, housing, or job placement programs that help prisoners reenter
society. "The challenge for reentry is funding," says James Hyman, CEO and president of
Cornell Companies. "If states can't fund programs for their star college graduates, how do they
fund programs for the prisoners?"
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/06/30/how-the-recession-hurts-private-prisons.print.html 7/1/2010
Page 3 of 4
PRIVATE PRISON BUSINESS HOUSES
2000 2010
The private prison business experienced a similar watershed moment starting in the late 1990s
and into early 2000. Shares of private prison companies then traded at roughly $2.50 (today, a
share of GEO or CCA can easily sell for anywhere between $21 and $29), CCA also had
thousands of empty beds, and the industry as a whole faced scandals over its treatment of
prisoners. Twelve former prison guards in Texas had been indicted for sleeping with female
prisoners, while a juvenile prison in Louisiana lost its contract after the U.S. Justice
Department charged its guards with beating and throwing tear gas at the boys housed there.
But two major events saved the industry. The Federal Bureau of Prisons saw an uptick in its
number of prisoners (from 1987 to 2007, the national prison population tripled, from 585,084 to
1,596,127, according to a report by the Pew Center on the States), and then post-9/11, the
Bush administration began to detain more immigrants and house them at a patchwork of
private facilities across the United States.
The industry's political connections have also likely helped ensure its longevity. The boards of
directors for GEO and CCA read like a who's who from past administrations and include both
Republicans and Democrats. GEO board member Norman Carlson served as the director of
the Federal Bureau of Prisons for 17 years. CCA's board boasts Thurgood Marshall Jr., former
cabinet secretary to President Bill Clinton and son of the late Supreme Court justice, as well as
former U.S. senator Dennis DeConcini, Democrat of Arizona, who, during his 18-year tenure in
Congress, served on the judiciary and appropriations committees. DeConcini says he has
never lobbied on behalf of CCA, though he did, as a board member, attend a meeting with the
director of the Arizona Department of Corrections and has publicly spoken in favor of the
private prison business. During the 2008 election cycle, the political action committees of GEO,
Cornell, and CCA, the three largest companies, were also generous, donating a total of
roughly $679,000 to political groups and politicians from key states where they are courting
new business, including Arizona, California, Louisiana, and Florida. "The private prisons
companies know how to play the legislative game," says Michael Jacobson, director of the
Vera Institute of Justice.
As the economy recovers, both industry stock analysts and executives from Cornell and CCA
say business is cylical and will rebound (GEO did not want to comment on the record). The
private prison business now houses just under 9 percent of U.S. prisoners, compared to 6
percent in 2000, says Damon Hininger, president and CEO of CCA. Though it's unclear where
the new business will come from, Hininger points to several options. California's budget crisis
could actually prove to be a boon to business, since its prisons already are so overcrowded.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/06/30/how-the-recession-hurts-private-prisons.print.html 7/1/2010
Page 4 of 4
The Federal Bureau of Prisons recently announced that it's looking for a few thousand
additional beds, and private prison executives argue that they operate 10 to 20 percent
cheaper than state-run facilities, in part because they do not have to contend with the salaries
and benefits of state correctional officers' unions. (Corrections unions, for their part, say that
makes the private prison guards less qualified and trained to deal with criminals and less prone
to oversight.) "When I think about the future constraints on state governments, the fact that we
can build quickly and cheaply only increases our value," says Hyman of Cornell Companies.
The only part of the story left is the prisoners themselves. As David Fathi of the ACLU National
Prison Project points out, "Prisoners cannot decide they don't like where they live." Because
the private prison business does not follow the same rules as the rest of the market, in which
consumers voice their preferences through what they buy, the question of how and where we
house prisoners becomes merely an issue of economics. And for the private prison
companies, the answer so far has been lucrative—as private prison executives are confident it
will continue to be.
Find out more about the social and economic impact of America's prisons in our series.
Read about the debate over whether cash-strapped states should cut classrooms or
prison cells, and find out why we should treat drug addicts in prison.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/06/30/how-the-recession-hurts-private-prisons.print.html 7/1/2010
Cor rporation of America-News Release 7/22/10 12:53 PM
Print Page Close Window
News Release
CCA ANNOUNCES ARIZONA NOTIFICATION NOT TO RENEW CONTRACT AT HUERFANO COUNTY
CORRECTIONAL CENTER
NASHVILLE, TN,Jan 27, 2010 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- CCA (Corrections Corporation of America)
(NYSE: CXW), the nation's largest partnership corrections provider to government agencies, announced
today that it has received notification from the Arizona Department of Corrections of its election not to
renew its contract at CCA's 752-bed Huerfano County Correctional Center in Colorado, which is scheduled
to expire on March 8, 2010. Arizona expects to begin transferring offenders from the Huerfano facility
beginning on March 10, 2010 and expects to complete the transfer on March 22, 2010. As a result of this
notification, CCA will idle the Huerfano facility shortly thereafter, but will continue marketing the facility to
other customers.
Last week, CCA reported that Arizona budget proposals would phase-out the out-of-state private prisons,
and the risk that CCA could lose the opportunity to house offenders from Arizona at its Huerfano and
Diamondback facilities during 2010. To date, we have not received any updates from Arizona regarding its
contract at our 2,160-bed Diamondback Correctional Facility in Oklahoma. The contract with Arizona at
our Diamondback facility is scheduled to expire on May 1, 2010.
About CCA
CCA is the nation's largest owner and operator of partnership correction and detention facilities and one of
the largest prison operators in the United States, behind only the federal government and three states. We
currently operate 65 facilities, including 44 company-owned facilities, with a total design capacity of
approximately 87,000 beds in 19 states and the District of Columbia. We specialize in owning, operating
and managing prisons and other correctional facilities and providing inmate residential and prisoner
transportation services for governmental agencies. In addition to providing the fundamental residential
services relating to inmates, our facilities offer a variety of rehabilitation and educational programs,
including basic education, religious services, life skills and employment training and substance abuse
treatment. These services are intended to reduce recidivism and to prepare inmates for their successful re-
entry into society upon their release. We also provide health care (including medical, dental and psychiatric
services), food services and work and recreational programs.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains statements as to our beliefs and expectations of the outcome of future events
that are forward-looking statements as defined within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could
cause actual results to differ materially from the statements made. These include, but are not limited to,
the risks and uncertainties associated with: (i) general economic and market conditions, including the
impact governmental budgets can have on our per diem rates and occupancy; (ii) fluctuations in our
operating results because of, among other things, changes in occupancy levels, competition, increases in
cost of operations, fluctuations in interest rates and risks of operations; (iii) our ability to obtain and
maintain correctional facility management contracts, including as a result of sufficient governmental
appropriations and as a result of inmate disturbances; (iv) changes in the privatization of the corrections
and detention industry, the public acceptance of our services, the timing of the opening of and demand for
new prison facilities and the commencement of new management contracts; (v) risks associated with
judicial challenges regarding the transfer of California inmates to out of state private correctional facilities;
and (vi) increases in costs to construct or expand correctional facilities that exceed original estimates, or
http://ir.correctionscorp.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=117983&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=1379865&highlight= Page 1 of 2
Con operation of America-News Release 7/22/10 12:53 PM
the inability to complete such projects on schedule as a result of various factors, many of which are
beyond our control, such as weather, labor conditions and material shortages, resulting in increased
construction costs. Other factors that could cause operating and financial results to differ are described in
the filings made from time to time by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
CCA takes no responsibility for updating the information contained in this press release following the date
hereof to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date hereof or the occurrence of unanticipated
events or for any changes or modifications made to this press release.
Contact:
Karin Demler - Investors
615-263-3005
Louise Grant - Media
615-263-3106
SOURCE: Corrections Corporation of America
http://ir.correctionscorp.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=117983&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=1379865&highlight= Page 2 of 2
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
MONTHLY POPULATION AND CAPACITY REPORT
as of June 30,2010
2-Ja1-10
6302_010 I 6/30/10 630%09
OPERATIONAL ON-GRDS OFF-GRDS TOTAL OPERATIONAL ON-GRD
CAPACITYn1 POPULATION POPULATION POPULATION CAPACITY(�) POPULATI
COLO STATE PEsIlENTIARY 756 747 4 751 756 753
CENTENNIAL CORR FAC 336 317 2 319 336 311
STERLING CORR FAC 1545 1521 21 2,542 2.545 2,531
LIMON CORR FAC 951 945 6 951 953 940
ARK VALLEY CORR FAC 1.007 1.001 10 1,011 1-007 1.002
BUENA VISTA CORRFAC 920 913 15 928 926 890
BUENA VISTA MIIN CTR 292 255 35 290 292 288
COLO TERR CORR FAC 936 905 18 923 944 915
FORT LYON CORK FAC 500 479 7 486 500 482
FREMONT CORR FAC 1.661 1.638 20 1,658 1.661 1.645
LA VISTA CORR FAC 519 514 4 518 519 493
ARROWHEAD CORR CTR 494 491 2 493 494 492
FOUR MR-F CORR CTR 499 495 3 498 499 496
TRINIDAD CORR FAC 484 479 6 485 484 471
S.T.L.at LA VISTA 30 24 1 25 30 17
SKYLINE CORR CTR 249 249 0 249 249 246
COLORADO CORR CTR 150 150 1 151 150 148
DELTA CORR CTR 484 464 2 466 484 480
RIFLE CORR CTR 192 192 0 192 192 191
COLO CORR ALT PROGRASf' 0 0 1 1 100 80
DENVER WOMI3N S CORR FAC 976 956 7 963 976 891
DENVER REC DIAL CTR 480 503 12 515 480 477
SAN CARLOS CORR FAC 255 249 4 253 255 246
"""SUBTOTAL""" 14.716 14.487 181 14.668 14,832 14.485
CONTRACTS.
BENT COUNTY CORR CIA 1 385 17 L402 1,374
CROWL,EY COUNTY CORR FAC 1.641 19 1.660 1,635
KIT CARSON COUNTY CORR FAC 1.001 14 1,015 1,274
CHEYENNE MTN REENTRY CTR 713 5 718 743
HIGH PLAINS CORR FAC 0 0 0 279
OFT-GROUNDS POPULATION: 236 231
ESC.APEES:W'AI Y AWA1S 243 215
REVOCATIONS-JAIL 0 0
JAIL BACKLOG:
BACKLOG LESS THAN 72 HOURS 89 41
BACKLOG GREATER THAN 72 HOURS(FISCAL 17D AVE-1041 160 42
BACKLOG-PAROLEES AWAITLVG TRANSFER 87 71
TOTAL JAIL BACKLOG 336 154
COUNTY JAIL.CONTRACTS 0 15
CONDICNTIY CORRECTIONS
COVLVIINTfY
RESIDENTIAL 1.570 1.570 1,558 L558
NON-RESIDENTIAL 115 115 105 105
PAROLE REVOCATIONS 0 0 0
REVOKED-RET TO CUST 243 104 347 274 274
REGRESSIONS 40 40 35 35
TOTAL CONDIUNTP/ 1.813 259 2.072 1,972 1,972
ISP
RESIDENTIAL 704 704 757 757
NON-RESIDENITAL 37 37 40 40
REGRESSIONS 5 5 _
TOTAL ISP 704 42 746 799 799
TOTAL COMM.CORRECTIONS 2.517 301 2,818 2.771 2,771
MALE POPULATION 20,766 20.896
FEMALE POPULATION 2,094 2,290
"TOTAL INMATE JURISDICTIONAL POPULATION" 22,860 23,186
1)OPERATIONAL CAPACITY INCLUDES ALL BEDS AVAILABLE FOR USE.INCLUDING MANAGEMENT CONTROL LNTTS.BUT
EXCLUDES EMERGENCY DOUBLE BUNKING.
(('COLD CORR ALT PROGRAM LAST CLASS GRADUATED ON 05:27 2010.THE 1 OFFENDER OFF-GROUNDS IS EN A COUNTY
JAIL AWAITING SENTENCE RECONSIDERATION
The TO Group. Inc. - Investor Relations - Press Release Page I of
CC ® Print Page Cl��c Nurduw
The GEO Group. Inc.
Press Release
The GEO Group Announces 1,100-Bed Expansion of the 400-Bed Aurora ICE Processing Center in Colorado
BOCA RATON. Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 15, 2007--The GEO Group, Inc. (NYSE:GEO) ("GEO") announced
today the expansion of the 400-bed Aurora ICE Processing Center (the "Center") located in Aurora,
Colorado. GEO will begin a 1 ,100-bed expansion of the company-owned Center in the fourth quarter of
2007 and expects to complete construction in the third quarter of 2009. The expansion is expected to cost
approximately $72.0 million. GEO owns and manages the Center under contract with U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement ("ICE").
Once completed, GEO expects the 1,100 expansion beds to be used by federal detention agencies. The
expansion will increase the Center's capacity to 1,500 beds. At 90 percent occupancy, GEO expects the
1,100-bed expansion to generate approximately $30.0 million in additive annualized operating revenues.
George C. Zoley, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of GEO, said, "The expansion of the
Aurora ICE Processing Center will play an important role in addressing the need by federal agencies for
detention bed space around the country. This represents the second expansion project of the 11 facilities
we purchased in our acquisition of CentraCore Properties Trust in early 2007. We are continuing our reviews
of what we believe are several additional opportunities to grow our available bed capacity through
expansion of our owned facilities."
The GEO Group, Inc. ("GEO") is a world leader in the delivery of correctional, detention, and ret i r
treatment services to federal, state, and local government agencies around the globe. GEO offers a turnkey
approach that includes design, construction, financing, and operations. GEO represents government clients
in the United States, Australia, South Africa, Canada, and the United Kingdom. GEO's worldwide operations
include 68 correctional and residential treatment facilities with a total design capacity of approximatey
59,000 beds.
This press release contains forward-looking statements regarding future events and future performance of
GEO that involve risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results, including statements
regarding estimated earnings, revenues and costs and our ability to maintain growth and strengthen
contract relationships. Factors that could cause actual results to vary from current expectations and forward
-looking statements contained in this press release include, but are not limited to: (1) GEO's ability to
successfully pursue further growth and continue to enhance shareholder value; (2) CEO's ability to access
the capital markets in the future on satisfactory terms or at all; (3) risks associated with CEO's ability to
control operating costs associated with contract start-ups; (4) CEO's ability to timely open facilities as
planned, profitably manage such facilities and successfully integrate such facilities into GEO's operations
without substantial costs; (5) GEO's ability to win management contracts for which it has submitted
proposals and to retain existing management contracts; (6) GEO's ability to obtain future financing on
acceptable terms; (7) CEO's ability to sustain company-wide occupancy rates at its facilities; and (8) other
factors contained in GEO's Securities and Exchange Commission filings, including the forms 10-K, 10-Q and
8-K reports.
CONTACT: The GEO Group, Inc., Boca Raton
Pablo E. Paez, Director, Corporate Relations
1-866-301-4436
SOURCE: The GEO Group, Inc.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=91331&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=106283... 7/1 2,'010
I he Gh.O Group_ Inc. - Investor Relations - Press Release Page ? of?
• •
(,A1 i.nib ion Rr1 in E(I : 1 i, statenienrs In this mess rely !..
....:! . .. -.c. °,cs. L iv net ",rt ncal a “LL fi,. 1J laokir y statements" 'dui R
; , (, , s an risks a LI "II{h c olid 531St actual results to ddfel
mem, x: lii,e Li( tic Company s Annual Report
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=91331&p=irol-newsArticle print&ID=106283... 7/12/2010
( orrections Lorporation ot America - News Kelease rage t 01 z
r `
Print Page Clc;
News Release
CCA ANNOUNCES RECEIPT OF PREVIOUSLY ANTICIPATED ARIZONA NOTIFICATION NOT
TO RENEW CONTRACT AT DIAMONDBACK CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
NASHVILLE, TN, Mar 16, 2010 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- CCA (Corrections Corporation of America)
(NYSE: CXW), the nation's largest partnership corrections provider to government agencies, announced today
that it has received notification from the Arizona Department of Corrections of its election not to renew its
contract at CCA's 2,160-bed Diamondback Correctional Facility in Oklahoma, which is scheduled to expire on
May 1, 2010. Arizona expects to begin transferring offenders from the Diamondback facility beginning in May
2010 and expects to complete the transfer in June 2010. As a result of this notification, CCA intends to idle the
Diamondback facility shortly thereafter, but will continue marketing the facility to other customers.
In January, CCA reported that Arizona budget proposals would phase-out the out-of-state private prisons, and
the risk that CCA could lose the opportunity to house offenders from Arizona at its Huerfano and Diamondback
facilities during 2010. Later in January we announced that we received notification from Arizona of its election
not to renew its contract at CCA's Huerfano facility and that we would idle the Huerfano facility in late March
2010. CCA's 2010 guidance, made at the time of its year-end earnings release, included the anticipated loss
of the Arizona contract at the Diamondback facility.
About CCA CCA is the nation's largest owner and operator of partnership correction and detention facilities
and one of the largest prison operators in the United States, behind only the federal government and three
states. We currently operate 65 facilities, including 44 company-owned facilities, with a total design capacity of
approximately 87,000 beds in 19 states and the District of Columbia. We specialize in owning, operating and
managing prisons and other correctional facilities and providing inmate residential and prisoner transportation
services for governmental agencies. In addition to providing the fundamental residential services relating to
inmates, our facilities offer a variety of rehabilitation and educational programs, including basic education,
religious services, life skills and employment training and substance abuse treatment. These services are
intended to reduce recidivism and to prepare inmates for their successful re-entry into society upon their
release. We also provide health care (including medical, dental and psychiatric services), food services ar
work and recreational programs.
Forward-Looking Statements This press release contains statements as to our beliefs and expectations of the
outcome of future events that are forward-looking statements as defined within the meaning of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the statements made. These include, but
are not limited to, the risks and uncertainties associated with: (i)general economic and market conditions,
including the impact governmental budgets can have on our per diem rates and occupancy; (ii)fluctuations in
our operating results because of, among other things, changes in occupancy levels, competition, increases in
cost of operations, fluctuations in interest rates and risks of operations; (iii) our ability to obtain and maintain
correctional facility management contracts, including as a result of sufficient governmental appropriations and
as a result of inmate disturbances; (iv)changes in the privatization of the corrections and detention industry,
the public acceptance of our services, the timing of the opening of and demand for new prison facilities and the
commencement of new management contracts; (v) risks associated with judicial challenges regarding the
transfer of California inmates to out of state private correctional facilities; and (vi) increases in costs to
construct or expand correctional facilities that exceed original estimates, or the inability to complete such
projects on schedule as a result of various factors, many of which are beyond our control, such as weather,
labor conditions and material shortages, resulting in increased construction costs. Other factors that could
cause operating and financial results to differ are described in the filings made from time to time by us with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
CCA takes no responsibility for updating the information contained in this press release following the date
hereof to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date hereof or the occurrence of unanticipated
events or for any changes or modifications made to this press release.
http://ir.correctionscorp.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=1 17983&p=irol-newsArticle_print&1D=14... 3/19/2010
t orrectlons 1.orporation of America - News Itctcasc Page 2 of 2
•
nu:.s. r ...... - ,,i_ 3-253-31G;
SOURCE: Corrections Corporation of America
http://ir.correctionscorp.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=1 17983&p=irol-newsArticle jDrint&ID=14... 3/19/2010
---- -- -- � • �• �� ^� ���!�u�'� nrrp- !r.Correchonscom.com%phoenis.Ahtml7c I I79,43R'p irol-neus.4r.
>
Pont Page Close '.`.
Nevc, Release
CCA ANNOUNCES A CONTRACT AWARD AT CiBOLA COUNTY CORRECTIONS CENTER AND
THE LOSS OF CONTRACT AT CALIFORNIA CITY CORRECTIONAL CENTER
NASHVILLE, TN, Jan 13, 2010 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) — CCA (Corrections Corporation of America)
(NYSE: CXW), the nation's largest partnership corrections provider to government agencies, announced today
that pursuant to the Federal Bureau of Prisons' ("BOP") Criminal Alien Requirement 10 Solicitation ("CAR 10")
our Cibola County Corrections Center in Milan, New Mexico was selected for the continued management of up
to 1,204 adult male offenders
Pursuant to the same CAR 10 procurement, the BOP did not select CCA's 2,304-bed California City
Correctional Center in California City, California for the continued management of the federal offenders currently
located at this facility. The current contract with the BOP at the California City facility expires on September 30,
2010. CCA will establish a transition plan with the BOP for these inmates. CCA is pursuing other opportunities
for our California City facility which may restrict housing non-federal inmates at privately owned correctional
facilities located in California
The contract award at our Cibola facility has an anticipated effective date of October 1, 2010, and has an initial
four-year term with three two-year renewal options, and contains a take or pay provision of 90 percent.
The company will reflect the impact of these contract changes in its 2010 earnings guidance, which it expects to
provide in February at the time of announcement of year-end results for 2009.
Commenting on the announcement, Damon Hininger, President and CEO, said, "We are pleased to continue our
partnership with the Federal Bureau of Prisons at our Cibola County Corrections Center, and are obviously very
disappointed that our California City Correctional Center was not selected for the continued management of
BOP inmates. The BOP is a long-standing valued partner of ours and we will work with them to ensure a
smooth transition out of our California City facility." Hininger continued, "I am extremely proud of the dedicated
staff at both facilities as they have done an outstanding job managing these inmate populations. We believe the
BOP's decision to not continue the management contract at California City was based primarily on escalating
federal wage determination costs in California, and does not reflect the quality of operations our company and
staff have provided to the BOP."
About CCA
CCA is the nation's largest owner and operator of partnership correction and detention facilities and one of the
largest prison operators in the United States, behind only the federal government and three states. We currently
operate 65 facilities, including 44 company-owned facilities, with a total design capacity of approximately
87,000 beds in 19 states and the District of Columbia. We specialize in owning, operating and managing prisons
and other correctional facilities and providing inmate residential and prisoner transportation services for
governmental agencies. In addition to providing the fundamental residential services relating to inmates, our
facilities offer a variety of rehabilitation and educational programs, including basic education, religious services,
life skills and employment training and substance abuse treatment. These services are intended to reduce
recidivism and to prepare inmates for their successful re-entry into society upon their release. We also provide
health care (including medical, dental and psychiatric services), food services and work and recreational
programs.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains statements as to our beliefs and expectations of the outcome of future events that
are forward-looking statements as defined within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ materially from the statements made. These include, but are not limited to, the risks and uncertainties
associated with: (i) general economic and market conditions, including the impact governmental budgets can
id? 2/14/2010 10 ;1 AM
rinr1• r rnrrecnorccorp_convnhocnn_ilnml°c 11798Vmp=irol-nc«(Ar...
have on our per diem rates and occupancy: (ii) fluctuations in our operating results because of. among c'
things, changes in occupancy levels competition, increases in cost of operations, fluctuations in interest rates
and risks of operations. (iii) our ability to obtain and maintain correctional facility management contracts.
including as a result of sufficient governmental appropriations and as a result of inmate disturbances. (iv)
changes in the privatization of the corrections and detention industry. the public acceptance of our services, the
timing of the opening of and demand for new prison facilities and the commencement of new management
contracts; (v) risks associated with judicial challenges regarding the transfer of California inmates to out of state
private correctional facilities: and (vi) increases in costs to construct or expand correctional facilities that exceed
original estimates, or the inability to complete such projects on schedule as a result of various factors, many of
which are beyond our control, such as weather, labor conditions and material shortages, resulting in increased
construction costs Other factors that could cause operating and financial results to differ are described in the
filings made from time to time by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
CCA takes no responsibility for updating the information contained in this press release following the date
hereof to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date hereof or the occurrence of unanticipated
events or for any changes or modifications made to this press release.
C.cnt act :
Karin CeamLer
Investors
615-263—?.i;0
Louise Grant
Media
615-263-3106
SOURCE: Corrections Corporation of America
of? 2/14/2010 10:31 AM
I- Asa.:
`
Print Page CP? _.
1N'evv, Rclr,l,c
CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA TO CEASE OPERATIONS AT PRAIRIE
CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
NASHVILLE, TN, Dec 04, 2009 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Corrections Corporation of America (NYSE
CXW) ("CCA"), the nation's largest provider of corrections management services to government agencies,
announced today its intention to cease operations at the CCA-owned and operated Prairie Correctional Facility
located in Appleton, Minnesota. The 1,600-bed facility will officially cease operations on or about February 1.
2010
During 2009, the Prairie facility has housed offenders from the states of Minnesota and Washington. However,
due to excess capacity in the states' systems, both states have been reducing the populations held at Prairie.
The facility currently houses about 200 offenders from the state of Minnesota. The state of Washington has
removed all of its offenders from the Prairie facility, but maintains a population of approximately 125 inmates in
two CCA-owned facilities in Arizona. The closure of the Prairie facility is not expected to have a material impact
on CCA's financial results.
Damon Hininger, President and CEO of CCA commented, "It is CCA's strong desire to continue every effort to
market the facility to another government partner, which we believe provides a viable option for our partners
needing significant capacity. We are committed to finding the right opportunity that will allow us to re-open
Prairie, so we can continue to offer meaningful careers to our dedicated staff, and promote economic vitality to
the Appleton community."
Mr Hininger continued, "We are disappointed to make the decision to close the Prairie Correctional Facility
Unfortunately, without an inmate population large enough to significantly utilize the facility, maintaining operations
at the Prairie facility isn't economically viable. I would like to thank our outstanding and dedicated staff who have
done an exceptional job, and we look forward to resuming operations at the facility at some point in the future."
About CCA
CCA is the nation's largest owner and operator of privatized correctional and detention facilities and one of the
largest prison operators in the United States, behind only the federal government and three states. We currently
operate 65 facilities, including 44 company-owned facilities, with a total design capacity of approximately
87,000 beds in 19 states and the District of Columbia. We specialize in owning, operating and managing prisons
and other correctional facilities and providing inmate residential and prisoner transportation services for
governmental agencies. In addition to providing the fundamental residential services relating to inmates, our
facilities offer a variety of rehabilitation and educational programs, including basic education, religious services,
life skills and employment training and substance abuse treatment. These services are intended to reduce
recidivism and to prepare inmates for their successful re-entry into society upon their release. We also provide
health care (including medical, dental and psychiatric services), food services and work and recreational
programs.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains statements as to our beliefs and expectations of the outcome of future events that
are forward-looking statements as defined within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ materially from the statements made. These include, but are not limited to, the risks and uncertainties
associated with: (i) general economic and market conditions, including the impact governmental budgets can
have on our per diem rates and occupancy; (ii) fluctuations in our operating results because of, among other
things, changes in occupancy levels, competition, increases in cost of operations, fluctuations in interest rates
and risks of operations; (iii) our ability to obtain and maintain correctional facility management contracts,
including as a result of sufficient governmental appropriations and as a result of inmate disturbances; (iv)
changes in the privatization of the corrections and detention industry, the public acceptance of our services the
)12 2' 1 2010 10.40 AM
•
timing of the opening of and demand for new prison facilities and the commencement of new management
contracts Ivl risks associated with judicial challenges regarding the transfer of California inmates to out of st.-.�'
private correctional facilities and 'oil increases in costs to construct or expand correctional facilities that exceed
original estimates or the rriabtlity to complete such projects on schedule as a rehult of various factors many of
which are beyond our control such as weather. labor conditions and material shortages resulting in increased
construction costs. Other factors that could cause operating and financial results to differ are described in the
filings made from time to time by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
CCA takes no responsibility for updating the information contained in this press release following the date
hereof to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date hereof or the occurrence of unanticipated
events or for any changes or modifications made to this press release
Contact Karin Demler Investor Relations 615-263-3005
SOURCE: Corrections Corporation of America
of? 2'14:2010 10:40 rAM
I he TO-A) liroup_ Inc. - Investor Relations - Press Release Pane 1O1 2
, Print Page Close Wiccow
The GEO Group, Inc.
Press Release
The GEO Group Announces 1,225-Bed Expansion of the 500-Bed North Lake Correctional Facility in
Baldwin, Michigan
BOCA RATON, Fla., May 01 , 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The GEO Group, Inc. (NYSE:GEO) ("GEO") announced
today plans for a 1,225-bed expansion of the 500-bed North Lake Correctional Facility (the "Facility")
located in Baldwin, Michigan. The expansion of this company-owned Facility, which is currently idle, will
increase the Facility's total capacity to 1,725 beds.
GEO expects the 1 ,225-bed expansion to cost approximately $60 million and to be completed by the
second quarter of 2009. GEO expects to market the Facility to federal and state agencies around the
country.
George C. Zoley, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of GEO, said, "We are planning to move
forward with the expansion of our North Lake Correctional Facility, which we believe will position GEO to
help meet the increased demand for correctional and detention beds by federal and state agencies around
the country. We look forward to the successful completion of this important expansion and to the
reactivation of this company-owned Facility."
GEO expects to restructure its existing credit facility by the end of 2008 to support its current capital
projects including the expansion of the North Lake Correctional Facility. GEO can add up to $150 million in
borrowing capacity through an accordion feature in its existing credit facility.
The GEO Group, Inc. ("GEO") is a world leader in the delivery of correctional, detention, and residential
treatment services to federal, state, and local government agencies around the globe. GEO offers a turnkey
approach that includes design, construction, financing, and operations. GEO represents government clients
in the United States, Australia, South Africa, Canada, and the United Kingdom. GEO's worldwide operations
include 67 correctional and residential treatment facilities with a total design capacity of approximately
60,000 beds.
This press release contains forward-looking statements regarding future events and future performance of
GEO that involve risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results, including statements
regarding estimated earnings, revenues and costs and our ability to maintain growth and strengthen
contract relationships. Factors that could cause actual results to vary from current expectations and forward
-looking statements contained in this press release include, but are not limited to: (1) GEO's ability to
secure a management contract with a client to operate the North Lake Correctional Facility on satisfactory
terms, or at all; (2) GEO's ability to obtain up to $150 million in additional borrowings under its existing
credit facility to support the expansion of the North Lake Correctional Facility as well as its current capital
projects on satisfactory terms, or at all; (3) GEO's ability to successfully pursue further growth and continue
to enhance shareholder value; (4) CEO's ability to access the capital markets in the future on satisfactory
terms or at all; (5) risks associated with GEO's ability to control operating costs associated with contract
start-ups; (6) GEO's ability to timely open facilities as planned, profitably manage such facilities and
successfully integrate such facilities into GEO's operations without substantial costs; (7) GEO's ability to win
management contracts for which it has submitted proposals and to retain existing management contracts;
(8) GEO's ability to obtain future financing on acceptable terms; (9) GEO's ability to sustain company-wide
occupancy rates at its facilities; and (10) other factors contained in GEO's Securities and Exchange
Commission filings, including the forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K reports.
SOURCE: The GEO Group, Inc.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phocnix.zhtml?c=91331&p=irol-newsArticle print&ID=113814... 7/12/2010
Ile ltl'.lJ croup. Inc. - Investor Ketaions - Press Kelease rage z or
The GEO Group, Inc., Boca Raton
Pablo E. Paez, Director, Corporate Relations
1-866-301-4436
Silk, ifatho;. Such :nt 11I1(i,•r tflc i`I..r.i,' :)eti.tri.ei Litigation Relotrli Act of 1995. Statements in this press release
regarding The GEO Group. Inc.'s business which are not historical facts are"forward-looking statements"that involve
risks and uncertainties. Fm it discussion of such risks and uncertainties. which could cause actual results to differ
from those contained in the forward looking statements. see-Risk Factors'.in the Company's Annual Report or Form
10 K for the must rcceritiy ended fiscal veal.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=913 31&p=irol-newsArticle_print&1 D-113814... 7/12/2010
2/14/2010 Department of Corrections and Rehabili...
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT of
• V CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION
Pr
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT of fi �°
;' CORRECTIONS ANDN E 11/%1 _
•-
i ;. . `., REHABILITATION From the •�
Office of Public and Employee
-v-4 Communications
Stay Connected
For Immediate Release
Contact: Gordon Hinkle / Terry Thornton
(916) 445-4950 Facebook Twitter
October 26, 2009 as VouTube Flidtr
CDCR to Close Three Community Correctional Facilities Due to , MySpace
Downward Trend in Low-Security Inmates
Request CDCR Star
Share I Print I Email
Move would save $15.2 million
Receive
Sacramento — Due to a significant decrease and anticipated decline in low-security inmates, the California CDCR Star
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) is closing three privately run Community Correctional in your email
Facilities (CCFs). everyday!
"There are a number of factors for the downward trend in lower-level inmates entering the system, including
Click to subscribe
recent parole reforms that authorize minor parole violators to be diverted to community programs instead of
prison," said Undersecretary of Operations Scott Kernan. "Meanwhile. CDCR prisons continue to face
overcrowding for medium and maximum security inmates, who serve longer sentences, and due to public safety
risks, are not eligible for low-security housing provided by these facilities. "
News
This past year, the state prison population has dropped by nearly 5,000 inmates, from approximately 172,200 to
about 167. 350. Approximately half of the drop in population were low-security level inmates. > Communications Home Page
"In the prison system, population management is extremely complicated with a number of factors that go into » Press Releases
determining where inmates can be placed," added Keman. "The reality is there is a segment of the inmate
population which requires housing in a celled environment and cannot be placed in a lower-level facility due to » Press Office Contacts
their time to serve, conviction history or institutional behavior. " » List of Public Information
Officers
CDCR today issued 60-day notices to Cornell Corrections, which operates the Baker Community Correctional
Facility in Baker and the Mesa Verde Correctional Facility in Bakersfield, and to the GEO Group, which operates '> Resources for Media
the McFarland Community Correctional Facility in McFarland. The contracts for the three facilities was set to >> Links Archive
--------------------expire on June 30, 2010 and provided a combined 822 low-custody beds.
The department will issue an Invitation for Bid in early November to use private facilities for an alternative
population, such as female inmates.
California law authorizes CDCR to contract with public and private entities to house low-custody inmates in
community correctional facilities. There are 5,913 beds in 13 community correctional facilities statewide;
however, 1 ,200 of them are empty, Earlier this year, the department sent a team of inmate classification and
custody experts on a statewide evaluation of inmates who may be safely housed in CCF beds. That search
confirmed there was not enough who qualified for CCF placement. The department also deactivated more than
1 , 000 lower-level beds in CDCR's system to address the changing demographics of the inmate population.
Closing the Baker, Mesa Verde and McFarland community correctional facilities will save $12.7 million in
contract dollars and an additional $2. 5 million by eliminating 22 state positions by redirection or layoffs of staff
assigned to monitor those facilities
These Community Correctional Facilities cannot house inmates who are sex offenders, inmates serving a life
sentence, or inmates who are disabled, need mental health treatment or have a chronic illness.
CDCR houses minimum-security inmates in minimum support facilities at state prisons and conservation camps.
www.cdcr.ca.gov/News/.. ./Oct_26.html 1/;
The GEO Group, Inc. - Investor Relations - Press Release Page 1 of 1
se ,.mow_ Print Page Close Window
The GEO Group. Inc.
Press Release
The GEO Group Comments on Cancellation of CAR 9
BOCA RATON, Fla., Mar 02, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The GEO Group (NYSE:GEO) ("GEO") commented today
on the cancellation by the Federal Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") of the Criminal Alien Requirement 9 Solicitation
("CAR 9"). GEO had submitted its expanded 1,755-bed North Lake Correctional Facility (the "Facility") in
Baldwin, Michigan under the CAR 9 Solicitation. GEO had undertaken a 1,225-bed expansion of the existing
530-bed Facility, and the expansion is expected to be completed in 2010.
George C. Zoley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of GEO, said, "We are disappointed by the BOP's
decision to cancel the CAR 9 Solicitation due to a funding shortfall. The BOP is a valued client of GEO's, and
we look forward to continuing our partnership with the agency at our existing BOP contracted facilities. We
will continue to market our expanded North Lake Facility to federal, state, and local detention and
correctional agencies around the country."
The GEO Group, Inc. ("GEO") is a world leader in the delivery of correctional, detention, and residential
treatment services to federal, state, and local government agencies around the globe. GEO offers a turnkey
approach that includes design, construction, financing, and operations. GEO represents government clients
in the United States, Australia, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. GEO's worldwide operations include
the management and/or ownership of 62 correctional and residential treatment facilities with a total design
capacity of approximately 60,000 beds, including projects under development.
This press release contains forward-looking statements regarding future events and future performance of
CEO that involve risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results, inc/uding statements
regarding estimated earnings, revenues and costs and our ability to maintain growth and strengthen
contract relationships. Factors that could cause actual results to vary from current expectations and forward
-looking statements contained in this press release include, but are not limited to: (1) CEO's ability to
successfully pursue further growth and continue to enhance shareholder value; (2) CEO's ability to access
the capita/ markets in the future on satisfactory terms or at all;(3) risks associated with CEO's ability to
control operating costs associated with contract start-ups; (4) CEO's ability to timely open facilities as
planned, profitably manage such facilities and successfully integrate such facilities into CEO's operations
without substantial costs; (5) CEO's ability to win management contracts for which it has submitted
proposals and to retain existing management contracts; (6) CEO's ability to obtain future financing on
acceptable terms; (7) CEO's ability to sustain company-wide occupancy rates at its facilities; and(8) other
factors contained in CEO's Securities and Exchange Commission filings, including the forms 10-K, 10-Q and
8-K reports.
SOURCE: The GEO Group
The GEO Group
Pablo E. Paez, Director, Corporate Relations, 1-866-301-4436
"Safe Harbor" Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements in this press release
regarding The GEO Group, Inc.'s business which are not historical facts are "forward-looking statements"that involve
risks and uncertainties. For a discussion of such risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ
from those contained in the forward-looking statements, see "Risk Factors" in the Company's Annual Report or Form
10-K for the most recently ended fiscal year.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=91331&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=139751... 7/12/2010
3/14/2010 Untitled Document
I Print Article Print This Story
iiernando County sheriff considers taking over jail operations
By HERNANDO TODAY STAFF
After researching the matter, Sheriff Richard Nugent believes he can take over operations of the Hemando
County Jail and save the county money.
Due to the current economic condition of the county and the continually rising cost of the county's contract
with Corrections Corporation ofAmerica (CCA) to operate the jail, Nugent said Tuesday he has conducted
research into the possibility of his office assuming the task.
The sheriffwill make a presentation to county commissioners at their meeting next Tuesday.
According to a press release, Nugent met with several sheriffs office jail administrators throughout Florida,
showing that his office can provide a better and more efficient service while reducing the County's cost of
operating the jail.
Hernando County's contract with CCA includes an automatic increase of 1 percent or the current consumer
price index-- whichever is greater a by Oct. 1, 2010.
The CPI currently stands at 2.8 percent.
Nugent said he can operate the jail at the county's current budgeted amount, allowing the county to avoid the
contractual increase of almost 3 percent currently in place.
Additionally, the current jail contract does not guarantee a fixed cost for the operation of the jail, as an
increase in inmates would increase the cost to the county. With his department operating the jail, an increase
in the number of inmates will not increase the cost to the county, he said.
After a flurry of last-minute proposals and counterproposals, county commissioners last September voted 5-0
on a new two-year pact with CCA that continued that 20-year partnership.
The county also won several concessions from the operator, including a reduction in the daily per diem rate
from$59.46 to $53, which began Oct. 1.
Jail costs are expected to be about $11.3 million, down from$11.4 million
During contract talks with CCA, the subject of the sheriff taking over operations at the jail were broached.
The possibility also came up during last year's budget deliberations.
'We wanted to see if there were any other options out there that could save us money,"County
Commissioner John Druzbick said Tuesday. 'There are other counties that are doing it. Now how they are
doing it and whether it is saving them money is what we are wanting to know."
1/2
COLORADO PRIVATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
2009 ASSESSMENTSAND OCCUPANCY
Bent County settled with CCA on the value of the 1,466 bed Bent County Correctional
Center at $39,000 per bed. This facility had occupancy on December 31, 2009 of 90.1%
and as of June 30, 2010 the occupancy was 95.6%.
Kit Carson County offered to settle with CCA on the value of the 1,488 bed Kit Carson
County Correctional Facility at $41,000 per bed. CCA rejected the offer. In 2008 the
County and CCA agreed on an assessment of$44,640 per bed. The County offered a
further reduction in 2009 and CCA rejected it as not enough. The facility had occupancy
on December 31, 2009 of 83.3% and as of June 30, 2010, the occupancy was 68.2%.
The Crowley County Correctional Facility is assessed based on $37,347 per bed. The
occupancy as of December 31, 2009 was 91.1% and as of June 30, 2010 the occupancy
was 92.5%.
The Cheyenne Mountain Re-Entry Center is assessed based on $21,204 per bed. The
occupancy as of December 31, 2009 was 81.5% and on June 30, 2010 the occupancy was
95.7%.
The Aurora Ice Processing Center was assessed based on $23,950 per bed (the addition
was not complete). The occupancy at that facility stays above 95%.
The Huerfano County Correctional Center was assessed based on $39,229 per bed,
however for the tax years 2007 and 2008 the Board of Assessment Appeals reduced the
assessment to $37,072 per bed. As of December 31, 2009 the facility was over 90%
occupied with Arizona State inmates. It is now vacant.
The High Plains Correctional Facility was assessed based on $17,899 per bed. The
occupancy as of December 31, 2009 was 80.1%. It is now vacant.
The subject occupancy on December 31, 2009 was 67.3% and it is the same today,
capped by contract at 800 beds. The assessment is based on $52,117 per bed at the 1,188
bed rated capacity.
8 a a o , a a a o a a o a a a a a a a a a a m A
m 8 0. ow ,_e
8 8 c8i ow 8 8 ow c8i c8i c8i c8i cc c8i c8i 8 8 b _
ancon
N U
O
'O ,' < N UO m O W . .. W N M .. N V
4f N O) V CO CO CO N N O W O N O V I-- en r r r N
! ,5 O <O : N r n O M (O V N ai O V I[I M M O O A
0) m co co N r co O N M O 0 V M O r t-- CO co N
`a) n N M M M CO CO CO V N V CO N N M t0 M r N M,
Mgt"'
m
a
x N
i-
K
10
T co 0 N N Q CO N CD C CO I-- 0 N N V V N N 0) N O)
C C LO 0) OD 0) O 0) COO m ! m (O CD m ' O a I 0)
13 c c o 0 0 0 o r r ca) 0 0 0 0
b, co
as
u
a0
O
x o
H S
N
0) 60 O N M N N (O O M N M N M M O) N O O 0) 0 M
OW N M u) 0 M 0 M R N O N O m * I) O UO 0) V
O x N N 5 N M CO < 10 O T M V M N M v) M 0) (O N M
N (N Uri 0) r p 0i .t (p .c o c N co- o N 0) (o N W
N to N N 0 M 0 N N CO O) N 0) N I� N V
LO_ O) N 0) O) CO UO CO 0 CO 0 N O M 10 0) LO N V UO
r r r 69
O f9
O
ILO
m
m
z
Olt N N 0 LO 0 < V N 0 0 < < V N N 0 0 CO 0 V O
O . CO N N CO 0 0 0 M 0 r 0 N O) co at I-- 0 0) en N N
00 O (O N r O M M N O 0) M n n (O (O (0 t0 UO N N
0119 M N N N N N N N N N r r r r r r r r r r
N
0
a
0
co
re
to C CO Y a Y a CO Y I X 0 a Y Y • X Z a a
mr a 0 2 0 0 0 U 2 0 O F U 0 0 0 Z F- I- 0 0
Ea a a ai - N N a a N a W al 2 a N N y
a a4 LL W O2 N fT0 N U U C O N N c 6 L > a > K
Y N 'C N C w v U
N N 9 L J LL LL C Z m a LL U a 1y Z
d
I- Y = O O - _ 2 O 6 ,
N = = a
Z Z U 3 '8 h LL c U '� Y c c D .� r U = 'u .13
'V C co LL 0 N _ N .0 O UJ .� t0 - - C 'U LL
O N O a a N 0 LL t0 N 0 U lL LL U 'U O N RI
-
LL LL C N c N O C roc (0 LL N O N @ (U 'C 7°u
N
0 N Tau
Tau
c
C O O U as N c 0 .9 N N a O- C c C N O 0 o
o N N -) d UC U U U O O U at
>` T O N C N ` O N ` N y `) C U N
` 0 O U 0 0 o o .0 0 0 o `o o` d 0 0 m O a
U t c 't3 U 8 m m U G U U w `o U
Uc O o 0 o d r y o ax) E E r c U U U N N
N 'o m r a U o a o 5 d U d `m '> a j g
i U z 0 D U LO 'o o T y E m E r
N C U N O N LL j E R 3
0) 0 N a
c E m o U
o m U 'c C m a) 0
O L o a O L >,
ex a to N
- U Z
I o
0
`o a O m a a 0 0 0 0 0 O a o a V) U ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 0
E 0 0 o O O 0 0 0 (0 0 0 0 0 0 -I 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
a 0
0
D Co n < CO CO en M CO V co 4) co CO r a r CO 0 0 0 V N
O . CO 0 N CO C) CO 10 N Co O V N N CO 0) CO It co Co
CO N CO N V (7 O (O N N 6 C) 66 N6 N W O O) N (O V CO
N N < N CO CO r N CO N O) (0 r N r V N O) CO V
d - en co N r, I-- en N N en a co N N (O r CO Co N r r 0) N
aV
'4 '0
K m
I-
K
a
>. > 0) at N N CO N V 0 O) N (- N V O) Co N V r V (O I--
ea U Co en co N a co co co co Co V r to co a Co 0) N N V Y) Co
D C 0 N 0 C) N O O O O r N N r r N O O O O O N 6
C of
10 0
2 0
U
m0
a
to e
Ko
w
H O
CO
c!) b V CO (D 0) N V CO 0 r r` N 4) 0 N 0 N N 0) 0) r V
O Q N) r d H N O 4) 0) N (O M N N N O (D CO V N Co Co N
O % C) N CO 10 N CD 'at CO 0 N CO r N 6 CO CO (h (0 10 (0
N r (O V (O h to N OJ O 6 O b m N O V CO Co 4) N O
0) O m v C) N O) N (O O C9 a n9 (O tam
Co Co
O C) cocoa
r V Co "No)
Co 1ow'
O 0) 4) (0 Co Co C) N (O r
4 r r r r
O
a`
i
a
rc
CO V 0 10 CO CO 0 < 0 O 0 0 V 0 N CO 0 0 0 (O CO N 0
O . N 0 0) CO CO CO V CO N O CoN CO(D 1. ) N V 0 r N 0 LO
N N N 4) V V a Co N 0 0 O0 a O) Co Co N N
co
U
D
ar
CK O U' H Q OU OU Z X Q z Z J U "> z F F F z Y Y OU
CO 6
a J o c o E cU) in
CO c m N 3 N N =) m
mw 0 m m c a > at d ni a 0 Cu) c 2 EMC C
c Q 23 a 3 O o S Z 3 o U a o m
f, m o
V ._a- c t m 'U C 5.,- LL U .)< a) ._a. = = W N m m LL
'0 C a 2 o = Z. - w CO N F t) 0 a; y m A
CO U 0 0 LL _5• N U (4 UW c = N ll C LL 13 N C 0 a) 0
T. LL T
LL C O U C O S C c 0322u_ N 0 U C 0) C C a t LL
0 c v Co g c 0 >' in a 0 0 o c 0 E 2 LL o
v v c U d 0 0 0 c d c o 0 .2 o 0 c
N 5 0 C 0 0 o tU TM ❑ o N C N d 0 Ear)
.0
,O ❑ -15 O U U 0 d a) 'V C E a) O O a) 0 E 0 o
O a d w a v U o 0 0 m d d U O U a ❑ ¢ •' ..... `o
w m 0 U o U a o c 0 0 c -o w 0 C 0 a, `o w
m U' >. X0 E `a) c 0 o m 0 co al o `m U w
o a� > N U d 3 U 0) o 0 2 a
COc 0 C
C N J m (°z a
CO 00 0 E
C C U
CO U r co
LL
co
=o
2 I
t U U O O C C O O O C O C C C O O =y =y =y O O
N w w w w 0 0 w w w 0 w 0 0 0 w w E E E w w
0 0 CD (9 0 0 (7 CD CD 0 CD 0 0 0 C7 CD U U U CD C7
O
O r O N N CO h CO CO r r CO CC 0 r N N N O) N LO m
O . 0) r N '0 N O N - r r (O Q r N V O) N CO m r
m a co N O C'1 O7 O ' r N4 O co r OJ C) V 6 r V N
N O) Cr) N O) < N L) 10 co co 10 OJ co co 0) co — — co
as V N CD C) V C N LO N r 6 co co a CO V N-
0_
U
CO
O '0
x 0
co m
▪ re
m
a s co r 0) r N CO LO r V 0 LO CO CO C) V V N- V 10 V O) N
RIO O N r ID 0) CO Lb r N I--- V H 0 O r r CO N O r 0 N
MC O O r O r O O r - O - - N N r r ,- O O r N
C GI• a 4i
f u
0 a
a O
xo
co .-
I- 4,
co
a+ w CO 0 V N OD V V 0 V CO LO V o CO CO r 0) 0 CD r N
o o LO co c0 O) o N LO 0) < N r N 0) O) m CO CO co co N C) CO
o x W co r r C) r r co O) in co <0 N. N 0 N- a> c0 co O) C)
N O O a a N O co- N N O co R CO LO C) O) N C N O)
co N- O co (O O) 0 CO O Ln co co co of co a) N O 0) CO 0
N C) r y N N N r C) N C) V N N ...co
r Q
0
O
a`
A
Lb
0!
a) CO LO 0 0) V CO CO LO LO 0 0 CO N 0 0 0 0 N N V N
O . N 0 r CO N V N N 0 0 0) CO N 0 0 (O r N N
O O r r r (0 co co to (O (0 co co N N a O O a N N N N
N CO
CO
U
a
m
m
W O UN C a H 2 Y 0 0 0 F z Z I- I a U 0 0 0 0 Z
o ui al
C U L' L O C C O N of O K N O d .C "O N
jC C N o 0 0 W C N N CO o C T 0 0 O w N N CO
= CO
a m Cl) r 3 m `m `m m IX m F CU r = m m m E
F,
V) ? E CO o Q v a Q o 3 �, (- 0
L LS U m Y c 3 u '5 -co`> 0 .r">:. C � = m ° '5 75
',, 0 `w o 0 0 m 0 0 U co D c w O a 0 a LL ,
La O c c <o 2 a 0 c - v N C u' 0) 0 (a CO .O Li
LL 0 0 0 c
N 0 C 0 O L1-3 N_ N 0 C U- >O a c O w 0 O O O
C 0 W C 0 (0 > N O N 2 8 "O d 2 0 0C
U c o 0 `o = 0 O o 9 `o O 2 2 > o `o m
a•-• u o 06 92 0 .0 0 o 0 0 t 0 O T `o a co 0 0 0 O
'y N N Q C "O y 2 2 O C 0 w N Y co 0
y r w o O0 0 C7 c 0 Z0 0 m 0 E a ?• 0
'm a c O 0 H c o m 3 E O) 0 O
c m c CO" U U m U H o Q O S U
O• r co O 0 t Y C
o F z a a m co
0 c to co
C O O a
E -0 0
C
i
a = 2
v m C7
r Q
0
\ \\} Co\ \
\} n } 2 \ 0
E // a
\\ \ O
't= §
8 ,c a ,< a a O 0 0 d a a a a 0 , 0 0 �,
c U c 0 w w w w c 0 0 O O w c w w
m U 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 U
O
N 'O O 0 LI) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
O N . O 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O
f m 5 a O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
9 N
m a U
ay a
M K °1
CO m
TO re
m
d' A
0
Z
O
O T ? o O a O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0
,m0 C 0 O O O O O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O
J C c 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0
c n
m - U
u m u
m a-
m O
me
i- m o
m ,_ o
a
u
m
LL
A b 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CCD
C 00 N 0
O N F p
0
V —
m
d
O
U Q
a a
0
ti
K
0
— o) CD CD 0 O CO CO 0 I-- o) O u) v) 0 0 0 O
o . N CO CO CO f') O) 0 r CD a M CO CO C--N N r
00 O N O) O) CO h h u)a 0 0 0 O) O) O) u) u) CO
7 N m 06 N r '- r r r r r r r r
1
m
U
o a
• a)
m m co
E
m
w C X X Y X J a a CO Co X X X J J
o F- H 0 F- U- J > 2 2 H I-- H LL LL z H H 0
CC
m OI N C C d le a, C U) N O m C N L O Y
O C '° o o a . m= > m o E ≥ c o c m
'C 'p N C If >w c O> O ° > c L C m E N m 0
ccoof a U Y U 0' ° m x m = O m > a)
rn m c `m o g a ≥
0 0 m ' D = U c m c E m - d `o ate) ea., U
D m m 2.' 'o m -, _ m o �.
IL 0 CO U N a) .m c N um. >` m co a) U N N N m lL
c c LL o c - m m c U U
o .2 m m N i° V N N c a) N 2
To ,, c o y U o LL `m t T o U U c co 0
o
5 O m m t o c v m >. m m C CD C 0 ≤) m
a, U La, N U o 0 u co — ° d e
m ° C ° ° U >m U ° O O O °0 >, 2000
c a = U CO CD 0 n ° m U 0 ° C c
m _N U c U 0. m
m m '� w Vo 0 0 a 0 E
O3 a m U u 2 > _ m U U
N N > 2
O a,
m O O C
J w 0 M 0
L
c' 0
To o
01
T u m o CO - N0 9-- OD o m III
c `m w o2 u
aspgx'o
`m c umi m d d m A o
d;m m N
w w a a w w a
u o�
iLLE
f
2 p
N Q
p V N
d`Z' b O O NI a O m O_
J V m C0 t� N t7 rI N 0r
"V M N
V O 0
f 9 q
m p
6
d• J o o � o 6 o o m
m - co n P 0 2 8 `d
4 _ _ _ a
�` � h - N- N m e
a E
o
o
p " o 0 o o o
Q t m m E m m E E
L O -
11 00
t U U O U U O 0
O
O LL CO CO M
O CO O toa
LL 4 COm' (0
d m p O N N
(� t� N - rl N
a
y U
oomp (0 r o
U
C T V N ID
t
t
m 30 u
d 3
re
i =
O 0 0 e N- n o m CO
'd CO N N c >
X m m C m J CO
f ≥ m 0 v o
0
6 U 0
Y CO
A
• v
O 0 O O O O O O
t. Vq O
U U U U U U U
O LL g 2 O 2
Uo U o
m - m
yd O _ co co Q
O O m.
U _N 3
C d _
O _ U O O U _
p 0 _
d d •_
U
U U T2 O d O
Z p Ti ti co
O o W m 0 _
mt U o UC E d
U O
no• N c 3 Q
O U
o U
C 3
c 3 t
0
i U
d
0
Hello