The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About931382.tiff SENT BY: XEROX TelecopierT 7:11-12-93 ; 16:09 : 3036P"570-,3033520242 ;# 1/ 1 Post-It"brand fax transmittal memo 7571 mown ,e Wd OW. "' O8- 9 5 F..t a- o Fist 6.45- 1570 November 12, 1993 Weld County commissioners P.O. Box. 758 Grsaly, CO 80632 Attention All Commissioners: Subject: Proposed Pre Parole Facility Plan I am a tax payer, voter, property owner, and long time citizen of weld County. I need you to vote against allowing the "pre parole facility" to be built in South West weld County. You are my elected officials representing my voice. This facility will impact the area in a very negative way. The Del Camino area is just beginning to sae some positive growth similar to all of the surrounding towns and areas. We are beginning to bring in new industry. It is already happening. This is an ideal area to live. It is an easy commute to many surrounding cities. We have a beautiful view in a peaceful setting. This is still a rural community with a lot of agricultural roots. Don't let the villa come into our area. If the villa builds their facility many things change. I have to worry about my children being approached by visitors to the Villa while they stand on my rural road waiting for the bus to come. I will 4j jfl extra law enforcement protection in my area which will be an additional tax burden on the community. I believe that kind of business we want to attract (retail, industry) will opt for other areas to build their businesses (I know I would).. Contrary to what the Villa is saying, I have been told by my mortgage company that my property value will depreciate. I will no longer feel safe in my own home. I believe that the losses will far out weigh any financial gains for the citizens of this area. WE DON'T WANT IT 111 WE DON'T NEED IT 111 LET GOVERNOR ROMER PUT IT IN HIS COMMUNITY III Sincerely, ( ��I��g Howard Trostel 9843 WCR 11 Longmont, CO 80504 931382 N0V 12 ' 93 15: 10 3036651570 PAGE . 00 9, ;219 E.kKh i+ AA-A- Cc: PL, eo c 45) SENT BY:nEoDATA SERVICES, Inr ;11-12-93 ; 16;03 ; 3036F1570.3033520242 ;# 1/ 1 Post-it"brand tax transmittal memo 7871 I#sr saw► 'Weld Ca.ComM;ss;e P"'"Rt\-o. Tros4c-\ Ca. a.. 0.0. M1°ne It 078.78-7475 �..� 35a-oet49. a■r 4c5^ 510 November 12, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greely, CO 80632 Attention All Commissioners: Subject: Proposed Pre Parole Facility Plan I am a tax payer, voter, property owner, and long time citizen of Weld County. I need you to vote against allowing the "pre parole facility" to be built in South West Weld County. You are my elected officials representing my voice. This facility will impact the area in a very negative way. The Del Camino area is just beginning to see some positive growth similar to all of the surrounding towns and areas. We are beginning to bring in new industry. It is already happening. This is an ideal area to live. It is an easy commute to many surrounding cities. We have a beautiful view in a peaceful setting. This is still a rural community with a lot of agricultural roots. Don't let the villa come into our area. If the Villa builds their facility many things change. I have to worry about my children being approached by visitors to the Villa while they stand on my rural road waiting for the bus to come. I will demand extra law enforcement protection in my area which will be an additional tax burden on the community. I believe that kind of business we want to attract (retail, industry) will opt for other areas to build their buss (I know I would) . Contrary to what the Villa is saying, I have been told by my mortgage company that my property value will depreciate. I will no longer feel safe in my own home. I believe that the losses will far out weigh any financial gains for the citizens of this area. WE DON'T WANT IT III WE DON'T NEED IT III LET GOVERNOR ROMER PUT IT IN HIS COMMUNITY II ! Sincerely,nc 1,a,& Rita Trostel 9843 WCR 11 Longmont, CO 80504 N0V 12 ' 93 15: 03 3036651570 PAGE . 001 9,71,24949 hob( + QB8 ca . PL, BO(r 5� Zwiu &go< / Athyli54-1- _ ,, _. , . sr9kb - - 4 4 , _ frie7/1/ . Ave4,6 . c .th rani. , 4<iiii _ . . v77=7 AV, sfiam,— .s ,t ± 4 d m l ut ✓`t9�2.ae�n.a/ %iv- /adw ate. I && • j CUV(e(2iy ,t/v ct, (,(Aecuriot ,/,,,,, Viet/ litidit r OenaeAl 4114/. /1 6 h;b,f &)(1 921249 et Pt, 60CC November 9, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P 0 Box 758 Greeley CO 80631 Dear Commissioners: As a property owner, taxpayer, and resident of Weld County in the Del Camino area, we are writing to ask that you give your utmost consideration and vote "NO" on the final review of application for the Pre Parole Prison being con- sidered for this area. Please consider our property values, property taxes, safety in our neighborhood, strangers frequenting the area, fire and law enforcement protection, quality of clientele, and drug and gang acitivty. We certainly do not need in our area what the Denver Metro area does not want. With all of the open space in other parts of Weld County that are not residential, why not consider those spaces rather than right in the middle of a rural residential area. We would like to think that the elected officials that we as property owners have elected will consider our interests and concerns and vote NO! Thank you for your time and consideration. Sfcerely,/ ' JaMes Vogl /1 / Denise Vogl 7489 WCR #24 Longmont CO 80504 November 10, 1993 • .... . .. . . .. .. .. . Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Co 80632 RE: Pre-Parole Prison Dear Commissioners: On December 8, 1993, Villa of Greeley will address the Weld County Commissioners in regard to their Pre-Parole Prison plan. As concerned citizens, voters and property owners in that locale, I would like to urge you to turn down the plan. We live within one mile of the proposed facility and feel that this plan will be detrimental to our established way of life. We realize that growth is coming to the area but we must plan and control the quality and quantity of this growth. Our children currently feel safe to ride their bikes to church or just around the section. When we moved to this area it was with safety in mind. We do want the crime, gangs, and corruption kept as far from this area as possible. Let's be realistic as far as southern Weld Co. 's law enforcement; we do not have the law enforcement to handle this type of development. Nor do we want to pay for it. Please allow the citizens of this area to have a say in the type of development that is approved. After all, we live here! And we want to continue living here. No one can say whether this type of development will affect our property values and our properties are the largest investment most of us have. Please VOTE NO! ! ! Thank you. Sincerel ,if J1 Pat Wachholtz 4875 Weld Co. Rd. 22 Longmont, Colorado 805 fichihd- E6t fir': ,C3acc 9 iM49 atALIII MC, 410 Main Street - fLongmont, Colorado 8050i 772-7220 metro 449-4331 November 12 , 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley CO 80632 Dear Sirs : I am a property owner on Weld County Road #5, south of Del Camino at I25. My concern is the proposed prison that is evidently being considered for our area on the north—east side of the Del Camino interchange. My oppinion is that the prison will hurt our property values based on safety, traffic impact and the stream of undesirable visitors . We now know prisons don' t put much money in a community, but do put an added strain on utilities, roads , and communication facilitites . '.. It is my hope that you would consider alternate sites where ground costs are less social disruption less , and where the response time from the Greeley sheriff' s office is less . Sincerely, Robeert J. Grigsby RG/th f% l ! _ /� —- d e r A. • ceDCG- Z > , 4 c, ice,, / 1_, ' s a �./// C td2L/7- (ACC .-. �C�> L �!ci )4c/C "2r< f, .. CIC CC /�C.i'cz :.tom'. -z: -c �'L c• >� ,r'!-z[ >� X.f/WJ >4- ir_`-c /_ - aa/ !� L/Sc lP'"n CfL, is" - !1 't-L�. 1 > C ,c ..G�c 6/e. le,te re_0, G ' �L— e e ,/,, :,/,./ e<I-'L '-t ��c Cam{', �L ! t/4,-_-_,4,-_-_, �z l < <C. �/il"-r�L� -L z e // > -CAL'£ �� L, C.--:52-,":-'-' , �-C�r1F'�c, Gz,�.r--��/ ,, t d�t .� C / „ec. y1,-Z4,'X-- //..e �c, 4,.-t. ce r > .---,e- 7' t -c'e z / e ✓ z°� G�' L. ti,/. �--� Ztr-c-c-� i � .G9 '�_� l v G l��.z-.0 _i:.er��-t; �i�c-:'-Ge / �x - c. y c' ;71/le': '� � � �/ � c ir-C1 (--!/ , .a-::- �rlj La lie.1.2-! so--)_.: , d' 'Lc J .0[74.--7'..t., !c £6L/_ c _ - 4-.;"/✓/J _ �/ _ � 7YLc-c..E�-�L L' tQ'!c. • C fC L��f IC �-r, --�Z zc'z L./1<e' C--e • �'7L t�-'b.E' c. .rc It' /' o c At--1-00 t21fc c-'1./ -ft.r•' f j *- ' f z L. J•%t E..n � ,._ •, /Lr" - v'�'2. � 1:-'40 .: � �> r Z.L'�1./�- 4y/ 1� ler.4. Y'S'� � ,L� 77/�" 72.7:77 .�jLe.i L -ref Kxe*-a --711,7,-->e./e; ICJ:- < rte, 16, p�,d/ �Ce' 'r L72.-{ �C -i4 / / 7 i. ...f.% �_�,E_ Q.�C2-f �f/. ` —Lt. i �L•-C alt G.F n <,.�; is c%ZiAcRL /O , i e---X/ „c---) exhih/f 6.-6{T ti‘>�> L, fit: , �n��r ee ; PT • A5oeC • 9;:1249 November 12 , 1993 Weld County Commissioners P . O . Box 758 Greeley , CO 80632 Commissioners : My Mother , Eva Rademacher , and I , James , reside on property one-half section directly west of the proposed site for the pre-parole prison . Our home of over 50 years is less than one mile west of the site on Highway 119 . We are opposed to locating this facility in our area . With this prison next door our safety and peace of mind are of great concern . The possibility of escape and the very nature of the prison business gives us a very uneasy feeling . Mother is general partner with seven of us limited partners in the Rademacher Family Partnership LTD . Our business is of farming , gravel and other non-farm income . We believe the future development of our land along I -25 and Hwy 119 would be hampered by the selection of this location for the prison . The location of this pre-parole prison does not help development in this community . With the special people that will be visiting and the security required , we are also concerned what new businesses will come into the area in relation to the prison . We strongly recommend that the Weld County Commissioners vote against locating this pre-parole prison at this location . Thank you , James Rademacher Eva Rademacher 3525 Hwy 119 Longmont , CO 80504 ( 303 ) 776-1179 t hh1I- Amm(I 2e : Pk ei?h29 November 9, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners: As a property owner, taxpayer, and resident of Weld County in the Del Camino area, we are writing to ask that you give your utmost consideration and vote "NO" on the final review of application for the Pre Parole Prison being con- sidered for this area. Please consider our property values, property taxes, safety in our neighborhood, strangers frequenting the area, fire and law enforcement protection, quality of clientele, and drug and gang activity. We certainly do not need in our area what the Denver Metro area does not want. With all of the open space in other parts of Weld County that are not residential, why not consider those spaces rather than right in the middle of a rural residential area. We would like to think that the elected officials that we as property owners have elected will consider our interests and concerns and vote NO! . Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, .-4/ G -/ Richard Vogl Margaret Vogl 11997 WCR 11%,, Longmont CO 80504 A ti C- 9 '? =#9 r r November 10, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P. O. Box 758 Greeley CO 80632 Regarding the placement of the Pre Parole Prison in southwest Weld County. I am vehemently opposed to this prison. My farm is located at 3528 Weld County Road 28. I was born at this location in December 1912 and have farm this land my entire life. I am concerned that a facility such as the per parole prison that is being proposed will greatly effect the neighborhood that I love. MY greatest concern is Protecting the agricultural lifestyle of southwest Weld County. This area is a strong agricultural area. However, if a facility such as the one proposed is built, I fear that this lifestyle will be in danger. There is a question o f safety of our neighborhoods as the number of people coming to the area increases. More people in the area means increase traffic in an area that is already congested. I ASK 774,47- THE L✓ELL) C V7 Y E?QAAL) OF C,p^ ISSIG�'VEF;'S TO 77__AYS/ WMV 77-1E APOL ICA Ti 4V E $? THE F' ?E f,34i 7L_E F'Ft'ISGn/_ Sincerely, 11 (SC (2�,.c,4,127*-(L./ 4".. Edwin A. Anderson 3528 Weld County Road #28 Longmont CO 80504 h i1 November 9, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P 0 Box 758 Greeley CO 80631 Dear Commissioners: As a property owner, taxpayer, and resident of Weld County in the Del Camino area, we are writing to ask that you give your utmost consideration and vote "NO" on the final review of application for the Pre Parole Prison being con- sidered for this area. Please consider our property values, property taxes, safety in our neighborhood, strangers frequenting the area, fire and law enforcement protection, quality of clientele, and drug and gang activity. We certainly do not need in our area what the Denver Metro area does not want. With all of the open space in other parts of Weld County that are not residential, why not consider those spaces rather than right in the middle of a rural residential area. We would like to think that the elected officials that we as property owners have elected will consider our interests and concerns and vote NO! Thank you for your ime and consideration. Since ely, / John Vogl 7250 WCR #26 Longmont CO 80504 t >d< e L 9,217. 19 Robert E. and Vivian J. Konkle 9893 Weld County Road #11 J Longmont, CO 80504 Phone (303) 772 8992 Fax (303) 833 3303 November 11, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Subject: Docket No. 93-28 The Villa of Greeley Application for special use Permit (Pre parole Facility) Sirs and Madams, This is the second letter of protest about this proposed facility. Since my first letter I have added information and stronger feelings against this permit application. After taking a trip to the Pacific Northwest I became aware first hand what this kind of facility on the Interstate Highway would do to the local growth opportunities at Del Camino. My reference is at Pendleton, Oregon where from the Interstate you cannot go by unaware of the State Penitentiary and the lack of any travelers accommodations. At the exits in this community you will not see any of the typical information telling about services also there was an awareness of the bright lights that illuminate the prison facility. This was very much like the proposal I viewed at the Planning meeting Oct. 5th 1993 for the applicant. When I consider the permit process that only indicates the "planned uses" of this facility and not necessarily the final ones. This service to the Dept. of Corrections could change dramatically so that a profit could be made, I am appalled to think that an applicant can satisfy your concerns on this matter with only the information thus far presented. The process should include things like a business case, where feasibility of profits are addressed, level of risk associated with this type venture, and costs that have been considered in the raising of capitol investment in the bond market not to mention detail written procedures that assure all parties involved in this permit process that audits of the uses are following actual permit use. Page 1. C'X/7i 7i f 7 L c7ci : PL ,' 6°Ce9 1249 renon r.l;ulf Weld h:'. , ;6 Longmont . GO "•0504 November i I U:i;, 'W : i:.l County +..'on1nl:....:i;. rlers i'. ti .box bc. :iret iev , CO il,t33i: I have been a resident of :.'-'uthwest Weld county for approximately Len yc:._i.'� . We are sell employed being in the dairy business directly across thu road irom a sanitation department which we were all aiso against . really had no say in ti,e rezoning . as we wer Lc.:.l' at, the meeting tti!: : ' were not enough people around it to bother . I'tie' Leo .' i that have been prcrlo:. : ng this pre-par'.'lo facility do not live in : !: 8 area . i do n.. Know them and nave never eiecten them spez.li. for me . Not living in this area these peop-.o 'ILA not know what we want and don ' t want . We do nut want a pre - parole facility i . a number of rea ,ons which irlciudc•: higher taxes , lower property values . :::e.l• tray; 2 is than the area can noid . strangers in our area, . There are .i number of older cl Liz.en living by themselves in :l• area and you must give some consideration also to their safety . I hope every. of you will Laito r.r:i 3 i;: ... eorl::..iderati a and vote against this facility . just once listen to the people }urs truly . Q;;;1(i'LL---.7 Doic.res I'ren!'.::. f1/" oc : A‘` 9.11219 u � gip- �-E L � < ,' / t�z cJ re:2,.c y.„, a--71 OOd 9 ' Exhih%t N/0✓ Ce : &; ,006-c.: 921213 ,.......9 ,2"----rw` Zc. 4-.( G'" 22 1) t ,,_ ,F-7 /�i 1 q 9 ! 7 dz/( )4J 2 /fl . -9,77741---- Y9//Gt . /2 . 4721.ei 7/ /-9Sec' 75--k i_>, ce9b5o2 szizia ,,.. ,r a 'r7,�, % -,/ I ' ' .11 l}I ,i / f F i,' / ) fir. //� /.�.�1 / ,, i ) /./ . . , ,,' + • /'; �i .{ Fes/ f ✓ YF _ .( ,,r // ,F. 'J /,q// i/f f-, ' , ' K ! . 4.G., , /?.' /,A /4. _, _ i f l : er, .;- , 1 / .. F , e ///. F / 4 ' -4i ..<".4 'Yk It: in'. ,,/,C l ylisi- s , / /; � . 1 /! / / .,. f[ / /� ' cF�, i4- e: , ( ; V/^ i/ ? / / e/ ,• y .11,/ ,/J / / W ' r( 9212.'19 'r 1/ &U 6'L) L3OCG :. 9u1219 November 9, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P 0 Box 758 Greeley CO 80631 Dear Commissioners: As a property owner, taxpayer, and resident of Weld County in the Del Camino area, we are writing to ask that you give your utmost consideration and vote "NO" on the final review of application for the Pre Parole Prison being con- sidered for this area. Please consider our property values, property taxes, safety in our neighborhood, strangers frequenting the area, fire and law enforcement protection, quality of clientele, and drug and gang activity. We certainly do not need in our area what the Denver Metro area does notwant. With all of the open space in other parts of Weld County that are not residential, why not consider those spaces rather than right in the middle of a rural residential area. We would like to think that the elected officials that we as property owners have elected will consider our interests and concerns and vote NO! Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, uLV CV 2v // Tom Stinar Jeri Stinar 11995 WCR 114 Longmont CO 80504 9 .12 49 November,h0, 1993 Attention: j WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: We will not direct this letter to any one, specific person„because all of you will be responsible for the out come of the final vote on the "PRE PAROLE PRISON", which has and will effect the fate of our neighborhood. All in all, this has been quite a trying situation for those of us who have lived here for many years. Speaking for myself & my husband, we have lived here for 38 years, & his family since the early 1900'hundreds. I am sure if the people who represent the "Villa" of Greeley, were to live here instead of us, they would feel the same, however, since it will not be placed in their backyard, it seems of little concern to them, about the feelings and well being of other people. What seems to be upper most in the minds of the "Villa" is really not even the concern of the prisoners, but the amount of money they will profit by this venture in the long run. If you approve this plan it will be a great hardship on many people financially. Many people in the area invest their savings to live in this area with the hope of retiring here. Selling their homes will be no solution, who else would want to buy them and live under the same circumstances. The value of our properties would be at an all time low, and many would lose their life savings. Its a shame that the few people who are the "VILLA" could upset the lives of so many, because of this undesirable establishment. The first concern we must have is for all the little children in our area who must catch a school bus, early in the morning, and return sometimes late in the afternoon. It will no longer be safe for them to stand alone or walk home any distance. If a bus load or children were in the Del Camino area stopping at Mc Donalds, Taco Bell, etc. any undesirables hanging out there while waiting to visit their friends, could be a threat to any of them. We feel that the local businesses in the Del Camino Area will be a definite hang out for gangs and drug trafficing. We just don't need any of those problems. What about the added traffic every week-end for the visitors. The bottleneck at the underpass and stop light is terrible. At times when you are going West into Longmont, you have to wait for the light to turn green 2 or 3 times, because only 1 truck and car are able to get through at a time. If you add one car for every inmate waiting for company, how in the world do you think this traffic problem is going to be solved? We feel this is one area the Commissioners should have lookedinto a long time ago. Why should we pretend it is going to be solved if the prison is there? Just another big problem to add to the list. I have talked to many neighbors & friends from Longmont, who have stated that they will no longer patronize the Del Camino Area, because of the problems that will be brought into that area, because of drugs & undesirables that will hang out in the corner businesses. Stopping there at night will be out of the question for many people traveling alone or students coming home from school to fill gas or get a bite to eat. It will change the whole atmosphere of the Del Camino area. Do you have any plans for increasing and having the area patroled if this passes? You will be putting many people in jeopardy, by the outcome of a yes vote. To change the subject of traffic, bad atmosphere, & undesireables, I EXhihif it?‘? 9Sa11249u_' ' Pzi .C3e page 2 would like to tell you of a young man, 30 years of age, from Kansas, who kidnapped 3 young women, raped all three & killed the 3rd one. He was 20 years oldand was sentenced to 20 years in prison. But after 10 years and what they considered, fully rehabilitated, he was released last November, 1992. After 6 months of freedom he kidnapped young woman #4, raped, strangeled her to death and left her body, naked on the ground for 22 days 11 miles outside of Pittsburgh, Kansas in the woods. The victim was my 19 year old cousin, who would have been 20 years old on July 2, 1993, but she never got the pleasure of spending that day with her parents and sister, nor will she ever have the opportunity of raising her own family. These priviliges were taken from her by some one who is much like the caliber of some of the inmates you are planning to house in this facility. PLEASE! PLEASE! Weld County Commissioners vote NO, before other people from here may have to suffer this same anguish. WE DON'T NEED IT! / 1 / //AS /'/J55 vv � 921219 County Commissioners Office P. Box 758 _. __ Greeley, Co. 80632 Dear County Commissioner: I am writing you in regards to the new prison that is proposed to be built at 1-25 and Road 24#. As a citizen and homeowner I am very opposed to having this prison built in the area. This prison would be a threat to everyone in the community. I would recommend that the prison be built much farther east where there are no homes or communities. As citizens we are tired of Weld County being a dumping ground for every project that comes along. Thank you for your time. Ken and Debbie Clark 7107 Maple St. Longmont, Colorado 80504 /� f" X/CA d ; PL; �3acc( ) �lei � �- 9012.19 5000 WCR #28 Longmont, Co. 80504 November 12, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P. O. Box 758 Greeley, Co. 80632 Dear Commissioners: My name is Judy DeCino, I live approximately two miles from the proposed pre parole site. I have lived in this area all my life. I have seen many changes over the last forty years. As a young girl I hiked along the St. , Vrain River enjoying watching the wildlife exploring and learning so many thing about the out of doors . I was saddened when so much of the river bottom was mined for gravel. However with the promise of returning to lakes and the hopeful return to its natural state. It seemed alright. I still walk along the many paths around my home and watch the eagles and hawks along the river. But if the pre parole prison were built I would no longer feel safe to walk along these paths . I feel that there would be no safe place to explore for my children, I am not sure that I would be safe working in my own yard and garden. The pre parole prison would change my way of life forever. My husband and I choose to live in the country. We believed that we could provide a better way of life for our children. With the building of the pre parole prison would they be safe playing basketball in the driveway? Could we feel comfortable leaving them for a night out? Knowing that the response time for the Weld County Sheriff is over 30 minutes at best. My mother comes to visit, she is eighty years old. Would she be safe while I work? I will be afraid of the strangers roaming our neighborhood. Things can be replaced if stolen. But when a family member is harmed by a pre parole prisoners' visiting friend, we will feel the effect of this pain for a lifetime. Commissioners, I implore you to please vote no when asked to approve the building of the pre parole prison. You are the only voting body that can protect my families' way of life that we so cherish. Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns. Sincerely, a --;tC) Judy D. DeCino VERNE P. BERRY 902 Third Avenue, Longmont, Colorado 80501 (303) 776-6529 �J�J� /"tt�yyci-it, /3, le193 reta6,1(±enuntori_erne t„,„ 6' ,Pog@x 7± al' Ahd..a.tt et) ctOCr 3 J. „1/6,/"-cce iC. ,7 t ��%�j�^'^�-'7..- f ,. ,--, L. �t/'�:�/.�f{,yam �7Bife-t de_e.Ec. £./c eetca &b•, �� ,vj&' C_��c..e.. o �2[�// 9 � f �L•-ten ,Goc-oL� Cc, Y. �&�.1.rolle ' ' /CS�i/rC.eal "47-cLe�-.,4k- 7 mt., cv p,'-CZ t- j /Ltt.fact 6 Zia v ceC ti,t ic-;--Zi p ttttiwI-tad (sus--4444_. _Oa %, ,,I C e ,,2e . �-a i_42,77‘4, ii. .�,� , t , ,-,,,a-.e., as ,z uLCt e r,_, ,-.4, k.ct e,- i -e. . L �// /, t/!� ,��9U� C6t�u��,ti-c..�.4 st2� , �i'�t .�—cC��vicess/ / i .4, 77 i/ Lceetia / rti, Z2,,,I Cti at ' l RnusCe. LLB .. a2 ,"er , i� �'z«-,C._i� 4 � ice-t— 4L -c z wt. :, 7 ; j �Gt-.Lea k_ Ccl2e. 1'a, 7E:4, 7e6," ;ta-ccC c W to-04 de'//i4A. ,4 t. c.C r� _ (�- . P,� c7 Zit( . /.1/ . e.2{ ,�. ..1.1,-Liid.L1..Cy,£B-e.Q/ et '� vt .--,A- die14,1 a vim- or A z. �, `yam v4irkf TIT t c , Pk ; /3 4 c-- 9;71219 l 7�'b`1 C'r._. 1_l / 3_ ... • • 1 '7 6 f G U iC s:1249 November 12, 1993 To Whom It May Concern: As a landowner and registered voter of Weld County, I would liketo encourage all of the county commissioners to vote against the Villa 's proposed pre-parole prison facility to be located in Del Camino. I have many concerns about this prison facility; however, my major concern is safety. I live 1 1/2 miles north of the proposed prison and my husband farms the property adjacent to the proposed facility. There will be escapes from this facility-which will be housing convicted rapists., drug dealers:, killers and thieves. The Villa developers have never denied that there will be escapes, they simply repeat what type of security they will have in place. They have never once men- tioned anything about the effects an escape can and will have on the immediate community. The average response time for the sole deputy sheriff responsible for covering this area, which consists of 440 square miles, is: 35 minutes. A lot of damage can occur in an "average of 35 minutes." Can Weld County financially afford to increase the number of deputies responsible for protecting the tax paying, law abiding residents in this area? Will Weld County hired the additional deputies? Another safety concern that I have deals with the undesireable strangers who will be frequenting the area visiting the convicted criminals in the prison. There is nothing for these visitors to do after their one or two hour visit is over. There is limited affordable housing ac- commodations for these visitors. How will these unwanted strangers pass. time while waiting for the next visit? Perhaps they will purchase liquor from the liquor store in Del Camino and go over to Barbour Ponds to party or relax. Maybe these people will sit around and drink coffee with the truckers at the fast food restaurants. If they become bored or broke, perhaps they will break into my home looking for money or cheap entertainment. Perhaps they will find a new market in my neighbor- hood or at the high school I teach in for their illegal drugs. Once agains, I' become the victim and lose some of my freedoms. I DO NOT WANT this facility in my backyard. I don not want to be forced to wonder if my husband will ftntl antq corn in his field when he goes to check water. I do not want to be forced into making my daughter a prisoner in her own backyard. I DO WANT to continue to feel safe in my own home. At the first meeting the Villa developers held at Del Camino, they boldly stated they would not build where they were not wanted. They are not wanted in this neighborhood. Please deliever this message to them by voting against their proposed prison. Thank you. Sincerely, P. Jane Jones 4652 Weld County Road 28 Longmont, CO 80504 biph f vv✓ cc ; avcc, (V-114 g, From: SCOT 8 CHELLE MAHLERT at *3037. /7 11-15-93 04:AR pm To: MELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS at M1 352 A242 AK of 08Z November 15, 1993 r ,1 Neld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Ne are opposed to the pre-parole prison. Ne are concerned about safety in our neighborhood and in the general area of the Del Camino, He are the parents of three small children ages, 2, 4 and 6. Ne have chosen to raise our children in the country to shelter them from "City" problems. They can play safely and relatively care free in their yard now. If the pre-parole prison were approved between possible escapes and the strangers frequenting the area we would live in constant fear. The law enforcement in our area is practically non existant simply because they has such a large area to protect. He travel to Longmont through the Del Camino interchange several times a week. Along with local traffic there are busses of children stopping on their way to or from events to eat at one of the restaurants at the Del Camino, on a daily basis. Once again safety is a huge concern. Neld County, especially the southwestern portion is an agricutural community. There is already industrial and residential growth which is compatable with the existing communities, this facility would discourage any further growth. Please vote against the Villa of Greeley application. Scot and Chelle Nahlert 9894 NCR 11 Longmont, CO 805044 N0V 15 ' 93 16: 11 3037725377 PAGE . 002 jcllhifWv✓W ° ; /-7; emc 9s 329 'Developing a world of ideoS - • _ 1 r HALLECK-WILLARD INC. 5963 Weld County Rd.416 PO.Box 237 Frederick,Colorado 80530 Metro line.(303)659-7814 Fax:(303)833-3303 November 15, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners, My name is Michael E. Halleck and I live at 5704 Weld County Road 22, near Frederick Colorado. I am also owner and proprietor of an electronics research and development firm, HWI Research and Development Inc, located at 5963 Weld County Rd 16, P.O. Box 237, Frederick, Colorado. As background, I am an electrical engineer and co-founder of a public medical electronics company called Staodyne, based in Longmont, that employees in excess of 100 personnel. Since 1984 I have been in the process of building HWI into another successful venture involved in research and development of high-tech products including medical electronics. We maintain in excess of 17 full time employees as well as services of 16 consultants. I wish to formally address the issue of the Villa of Greeley in asking the board of Weld County Commissioners to approve their pre-parole prison program. I would like to state at this time that I am not opposed to prison systems incorporating bars on the windows, high fences, guards and sufficient police protection mechanisms in place. What I am opposed to are minimum security facilities such as has been proposed by Villa of Greeley. This structure is proposed to be built in the center of an area that provides close access to a public park, high density areas and rigorous new business growth and development. In the event that such a minimum security facility is constructed in this area, I am concerned for the safety of my employees and their children. ti)/1,)/ � A single source company, from design to production. r K/;/`lr f )bCX ee ; Gl_ �3` C 9- .;v 13 There is an insufficient police force in this area to provide for basic police protection for the present population, let alone a minimum security facility that at times will have as few as one guard protecting a multitude of potential assailants. In addition, when it becomes necessary to increase the police force, the people living in the immediate area will be taking on the responsibilities and extra tax burdens for additional police protection. Of the business men that I have discussed the issue with I know of none that would want to build additional facilities in this area with such a minimum security facility in the vicinity. It is my belief that this project would dramatically reduce business growth and development in this area and therefore jobs of the future would be directly affected. I suspect that businesses previously committed to this area might have considered other locations with the construction of such a facility. HWI presently owns 8 acres of industrial land. Any future land acquisitions will certainly be directly affected by the outcome of this issue. If it is the intention of the Weld County Commissioners to restrict business in Weld County, then approval of this facility would be an excellent method for restricting survival and introduction of businesses. I sincerely request that you consider the wishes of the people that live in this area and future business growth when you make your decision about the construction of this facility. I am aware that this is a done deal since the State of Colorado is pressing for such a facility, but-please consider the people in your county. I am totally in support of the traditional prison system, but I am thoroughly opposed to the concept of minimum security facilities disguised as prisons particularly when placed in an area that can cause explosive problems for the future. It grieves me to consider having to purchase handguns for personal protection at home and at my place of business. Presently I own no hand guns and would prefer to keep it that way. Sincerely, Michael E. Halleck, President HWI 9,.-1 ;319.r,. November 13 , 1993 Weld County Commissioners P . O . Box 758 Greeley , Co . 80632 ] Commissioners : I live in one of "the 10 houses " in the 2-mile radius of the Villa ' s proposed Pre-Parole Prison site . It is . 9 miles via the road to my driveway . Not to be redundant with all the reasons of which you are cer- tainly aware by now and with which I agree , I may have a few unique feelings/reasons of my own . I am a single , middle-aged female that works on the off-shift which means that I would be leaving my home after dark to go to work and sleeping during the day . I have non-weekend days off therefore I do things like irrigate from the Rural Ditch which runs directly south and then east of this pre-parole prison facility . I am hearing that "visitors " have been known to sleep out in vehicles or in fields close to a facility of this type and this greatly concerns me in addition to all the other concerns . When I first learned of the possibility of a "prison " in the im- mediate area , my first thoughts were , "Why put something along this I-25 Corridor that would discourage other businesses from coming in here? " I have lived at this address for 13+ years and have known that the area would surely be developed with homes , businesses , golf courses , camp grounds , etc . I am not so naive to think that it will remain a farming community forever . We do have three gas stations , four fast-food places , two res- taurants , a liquor store , etc . There are several young people that work in these establishments . There is the State-owned Barbour Ponds recreational area which old and young both use , staying overnight during the summer months . This Del Camino area has finally reached the point that it is growing , changing and has a good reputation after some rather rough years . My wish is to see this trend continue , not regress and become an eyesore along this beautiful front range community . I am currently proud to say to people take Exit 240 at Del Camino go north on the east frontage road and turn on WCR 24 1 /2 to reach my home . I NEVER want to say take the east frontage and turn right at the prison . . . . This safety , health and well -being of our community and Southwest Weld County rests in your hands . Good luck with your decision- making . incerelyr Ja EnglandC. PG , 73/56"C /" -r , ; 9f1249 November 13 , 1993 Weld County Commissioners P . O. Box 758 Greeley , Co . 80632 I live in one of the "10 houses " in the 2-mile radius :.;0_f the Villa ' s proposed Pre-Parole Prison site . It is . 9 miles from the Prison . I am also a single woman . I am very concerned about the health and welfare of all respec- table establishments in this area , not to mention all friends , families and my personal well -being . The Del Camino meets many people needs with their gas stations , restaurants , motels , truck parking and recreation area . I can ' t help but feel this Pre-Parole Prison will detour the areas growth and cause some businesses to pack up and leave . I also do not be- lieve our property values will increase which has been stated . I am out working late in the yard , working with the animals and also irrigating , burning and spraying irrigation ditches just east and north of the Prison site . Many nights we are out past dark . I feel there is enough crime and worry in todays world , so why invite the possibility of more to come directly into our neigh- borhood . If this facility is being considered to help the financial sit- uation of the Saint Vrain Sanitation District , then I would hope that it be looked at again . I can only see businesses leaving and little or no growth in the future . We need to encourage positive businesses to come into this area so that we all can benifit . Lets keep this beautiful front range community growing in the right way and not lose everthing so many people have worked so hard to build . There is a time and place for everything--this is not the time or place for a Pre-Parole Prison , whether it be this location or any other location in Southwest Weld County . I can only ask that you take a hard look at this proposal and ask yourself , "Would I want a facility like this in my back or front yard" ? I trust you will give the Southwest Weld County Community a fair decision . Thank you for your time . Sincerely , -"nlankfr Marilyn Rupple xM/h t �� . �c 11/12/93 Dear Weld Co. Board of Commissioners, We live at 7513 Weld Co. Rd. 16. We moved here 2 years ago from the Denver metro area. We came here to your community with desires of a quiet and safe place to raise our 5 year old son. We are now threatened with the prospects of a prison being built near us. It's a very scarry thought ll "Birds of a feather' is what worries us. If a prison is built In this area we will no longer feel the security to trust the traffic going down our road or to let our little boy play in his own front yard without worry. As a licensed real estate agent for 10 years, I realize that property values would not increase. The detrements of a prison system, that is , the saftey issue, strangers frequenting the area, added traffic, far out weighs any proposed positive aspects. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Richard and Rebecca Lyall --X/2/22/-/-/4AM C'�' , 'ems iu VaSr Pi/ Nary- «// 1. OUO !1130 33 kip= ' KS 4'6)Ae IV c i.. . ; Ra : VILLA- 0P Mee/ey : /zt $4 ' . - � to ' Aii7c. . ) p,Q am w hyfr'j- fir, /iteem1e- S eu-- i-og_- ra ,e)r, ,_ e.evrtiiu0 (4&Z4 _ o_ 4 _ atilitu S S--i �� a Qi , may ayat l&I 6(,m a oAkek }4A. kiii-LeJi &Nte, Aga . 4-1,e4-/S , kcaby e . - tiro tkit a _, Irt,a/t-Q iipn_ (_-/-i-if svAkvitto, kzi s < Le_ v ,__gy , tx74, 7n5 ,lir. arut , u) .>-6-x..(44 AT ( & I/42( S/uc/ vs,n/Lo r / 01/24 _tit-4 A . tioycyunG__, (4,O,,_ '4)&51(5 6ttz: : K /b e L Ay c_ ,I� _1;. a�''1 Ei. - L 9,212,19 &' .' LLB L ?c ikev 4 -ks . - ainxvnAC. -6 tpytti,4? oP wat 2 .A7nAtig( , fraed- a/tfatt711, . )b w _ - aA.e, ,Kee aid` -6 a4-elar --1 t/rit/t jo - &-UA, O,(G ,t. gieS �? taA ,Atts9, ye -A% do I li-u/Lg i aynse &C/a e, a.fi boathtte aazw - 0A-aA 4iati , 44, MAid- 9 24t Q. 3 20 �� - - cLett‘ “Leeitee -Ai" ( -411e'r:/:,wreA-)-6Ailea s &tS & . �. L - V( - 7/ a,/a --Lo,dydr417712)%wiG a,t-€ ? /4 �- (Sfyt,tc_ AoiMti � o� -1/1a-+- a/u az jkie_ ffrt-ft W6i reptair:4- max , - - 71(it) Wnp:-4S6A 6 ) f. ci � tin �6 It4fltcz - w/uL - u)h 4e),-Atx Gte - . w� LAzefi,,bAt i4n.nruz leAle--"LZ Ifrieft . 471,im - ,y6/m, goacQ144F4igra*Fitoafbi 4 J117611 . ape- vi . p\lc� �'l�l.G ��iYwiMir- 7h, lf" Cl ) A__ - (OlgAti Wet - ✓maw G11//t! ‘f . P/4 rt t Sytetril GO — (Sir� � a�s- - ck A_ vitjmi)nuz4A °UL Mt Af2,kevg_ cotze4, & L ,4- C vvtaAn J btheitecitJ -aivaio 4 _ i. lleot , ,a40 (JAL COHA-41, At -ern' _ ina4evritavn, 4- .(Le9- st17,,,ain-i/Aac A7,714-p atni -,‘„L„ -6(v)÷id,;48,2„ , bitA arLeik, etnc., 411- 6 ayholl _AL ginue, �,�� bra- ��w� SO U - otO fl4 a- -IAt c',/n it) csenvit. „Ida_ 6 ,uO( lyce.fecaAe, ` _ / !M AAA azyLi .4-frrue_t t t w Fa ye pc. 7 ...tegjeky,ed2 frA ,t)n,yrkA,t-) 0-) efl04,04r et- - crt.„,n, 6, 54,:her. La A_ 96,6air Vet ,. ./714A% McIntyre & Rawlings n „-------- Attorneys &Counselors at Law Keith A. McIntyre • Sherry L. Rawlings November 17 , 1993 Essex Square The Board of County Commissioners County of Weld State of Colorado 915 Tenth Street Greeley, CO 83632 In Re: Pre-Release Center - Del Camino Set for Public Hearing December 8 , 1993 at 10: 00 Dear Member of the Board of Commissioners: I am writing this letter to you as I believe I will be unable to attend the hearing on December 8 , 1993 . I would, however, like to express my opinion concerning the pre- release facility. fly appointment of the Board of County Commissioners, I served on the Community Corrections Board for a total of six years here in Weld County and was Chairman for approximately three of those six years. In addition, I formed and was President of the Colorado Association of Community Corrections Boards. I am no longer associated with any community corrections activities , however, because of my experience with the Community Corrections Board and programs, I feel compelled to come forward concerning the issue of the pre-parole facility. It has long been felt by myself and many others that it is an absolute ncessity to have some sort of a transitional facility to assist people in the changes that will occur as they move from the penitentiary setting back into the general public sector. Many prisoners get that experience by going through half way houses operated by community corrections boards, in an attempt to assist in blending them back into the comuu.nity. However, many prisoners do not get the opportunity to pass through the half way house. A pre-release center is designed to try to give the people returning to society some training that rtabt help then avoid violations in the future. • 1122 9th Street, #203 • Greeley, Colorado 80631 • (303) 352-4776 • FAX (303) 3526Mi9 h A if CC'L'-L "eL UGC_ November 16, 1993 Letter to Weld County Board of Commissioners Page 2 It is my understanding that the maximum length of stay of any person in the center will be six months, with an average length of stay of ninety days. Many emotional comments have been made concerning this pre-release center around the county. I would point out for your consideration, however, that every person in this pre-release center is going to be released within a maximum of six months into society. That is true whether they go through the pre-release center or not. It appears to make sense to take sense to blend them tack into society with, perhaps, a little more success. The fact remains that even without the pre-release center, these people will be released at approximately the same time if they do not go through a pre-release center. I would also point out, that the escape risk would seem to be minimal since they are all within six months of release into society. During the course of my experience with the Weld County Corrections Board, I became acquainted with the operations at The Villa as they pertain to both the treatment facility and the restitution center (half way house) . Both of these involve people who have been convicted of felonies, and for most of them, they involve people who have been in the penitentiary and are on their way back to society. I would point out that The Villa has operated both of these facilities in the same physical structure with a facility that cares for the elderly and people with special needs, with virtually no difficulties either at the site or in the community. This is largely due Lo ti-e care, nanagoment skills and security of the people operating The Villa. I have every expectation and belief that Mr. Coppom and his associates can operate the pre-release center in the same fashion and as well as they have operated the Restitution Center and the Regional Treatment Center. Lastly, with regard to the location at Del Camino; having lived in this area some twenty-two years and having represented people who own property in Del Camino, I am familiar with the Del Camino area as well as the proposed location of the pre-release center. It would appear that that particular location would be ideally suited for a center of this nature. ■m ■■■■ ■uE Keith A. McIntyre •Attorney at Law 9:112,' 49 November 16, 1993 Letter to Weld County Board of Commissioners Page 3 I would point out that there are very few private residences within any reasonable distance from the center. There is available, however, lodging and food for anyone visiting the center or working at the center. There is also easy access to the facility from Interstate 25, the major north-south thoroughfare in Colorado. I would point out that when the facility was originally proposed in Greeley, I in fact lived just west on the Poudre River from the proposed site and because of my knowledge of the operators and the need for the facility, felt completely comfortable with having them in that site as well . In summary , I would point out Chat it is illy firm beiiccL that a facility of this nature is necessary as a part of our corrections system, that the management group that would be involved with it has proved their ability to competently handle a facility of this nature and that the location is probably as well sited as can be. I would further point out that it will generate jobs for this area. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to present my views on this matter. Sincerely, "(4O 1th A. McTntyre KAM/lj fax to Mike at Restitution Center no .n. Keith A. McIntyre •Attorney at Law "" •_• n, rCS WESTVIEW PRINTING `' r- • ` - November 18 . 1993 The Weld County Board of Commissioners P.Q. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632 Dear Commissioners : I am writing this letter to voice my approval of the pre release facility that is proposed near Del Camino. I do not see that this facility creates any problems , quite to the contrary I feel that it will bring needed jobs , income and additional tax dollars to Weld County . I have lived in Weld County all my life and I do not see how this facility is any more dangerous than the county jail or the Adams County facility that is located in Brighton. Very Truly yours , Bruce Carlisle 1015 25th Avenue Q Greeley, Colorado 80631 Q Phone(303)352-6595 O Fax(303)352-7201 mAA'AltrtU W SS 1`4y` , („tl`7) / 7, 3 LIMS Co. r3o-- Dr< 4, , Joitaxk ictocci0A ftJ c9S d-ywy,(Ayteu • k-7-0-ted av - Loitat1a,,i,t0 yiA ?-tk r � e - ` c( , )Tylya.. AA -a/xf2/2-toAdt.L d D-e/e eLi lj . CGv / "Ate .22-t-, A;e-c-e9-2- 1jJ 2h • WA - , .,ice /ive c ` G �-U� Co- /(S--�� g-1a G'o . C6 ‘.2. 0 [xi? EEEE c c : 12Z. ; ,on�� 71— 9211249 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION North Region Office COLORADO 3842 S.Mason#202 .. COL R DO Ft.Collins,Colorado 80525 Phone (303)226-6641 FAX (303)226-0361 Roy Romer Governor Laurie A.Mathews Nov. 23, 1993 Director Weld County Commissioners 915 10th Greeley, CO. 80632 Dear Commissioners: I am writing this letter to express my concerns about the construction of a minimum security facility near Barbour Ponds State Park. It is my understanding that this facility will have 386 beds and will be staffed primarily with counselors and support staff, the guards being unarmed. I have also been informed that any law enforcement problems are to be handled by the Weld County Sheriff's Department , and the area is to be fully lighted all night. The concerns the Colorado State Park System have with this facility are the law enforcement coverage, the lighting of the area, and the effects it would have on the visitors at the park and the marketability of the park. At present, the Weld County Sheriff's Department has only one unit available for this area and the response time for assistance is generally 30 minutes or more. This does not seem an adequate response to a facility housing 350+ inmates with unarmed guards. The all night lighting of the area would be a major detractor for overnight campers at Barbour Ponds State Park. The psychological affect of having a prison directly across the interstate from the park would also be very negative. The visitor's sense of security would be greatly compromised. We have made huge strides in law enforcement and security at the park in recent years, but this facility would present a security issue that we are not capable of mitigating or neutralizing. Lastly, several area merchants feel this facility would greatly detract from future business and residential development of the Del Camino area. This would have a long term affect on growth and development of the park as well . In conclusion, the Colorado Sate Park System is very concerned about the possibility of the construction of this security facility for the reasons mentioned above . Respectfully, gee_ 212a.Latyz, Joe Maurier North Regional Manager Colorado State Parks�� 12-1n1}9 / printed on recycled paper 9Z12-19 gPUNLA,4 MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT s• Administrative Office: ' " F H�°' E. r �,, s 700 Weaver Park Road• Longmont, CO 80501 e 8 (303) 772-0710 Metro (303) 666-4404 �'■L E l NEW November 23, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners: The Mountain View Fire Protection District has been advised that Mr. Conrad D. Hopp recently sent a letter to you voicing his opinion regarding the proposed pre-parole prison site at Del Camino. Although Mr. Hopp is a member of the Mountain View Fire Protection District Board of Directors, the letter written to the Weld County Commissioners was his personal opinion, and not the opinion of the District nor its Board of Directors. At this time the Board of Directors is in the process of scheduling a special meeting at which to address the pre- parole prison site issue. Subsequent to that meeting, the Board of Directors will render its opinion, in writing, on this issue for the Commissioners consideration. We are sorry for any misunderstanding with regard to Mr. Hopp's letter. Respectfully, ._,c11 ;t»la J . � ? �e /tee,.' Thomas Bough-y, o Director, Mountain View Fire Protection District dlm WC.L Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Station 6 Station 7 9119 Only Line Rd. 10971 WCR 13 P.O.Box 575 P.O.Boa 11 10911 Dobbin Run P.O.Box 666 P.O.Box 40 Longmont,CO Longmont,CO 299 Palmer Ave. 8500 Niwot Road Lafayette.CO 600 Briggs 100 So.Forest St. 80501" 80504 Mead.CO 80542 Niwot,CO80544 80026 Erie,CO80516 Dacono.CO 80514 -yhlblr666G c:c : ,�, .6lrcc; 9a1.249 November 24, 1993 Weld Co. Board of Commissioners D.O. Bcct 758 Greeley. CO 80632 Dear Stns, I would like to express my support for the Del Camino Minimum Security Phdlity currently under consideration. I believe that it would be in the best interests of the people of Weld County that this proposed (hay be approved. My support for this project Is based upon the following considerations: • I oppose state mandated penal system population limitations • I believe this type of pearel r (hdlity often a positive and socially responsible alternative to"traditional" detention centers • I support the concept of leocnteip ise and broadening this philosophy into the realm of privately owned correctional fhdlities makes good economic sense • I do not perceive this fhc ility or its location to pose a prima-facie threat to the welfihnc and safety of Weld Co. residents D1mar take threr actors into consideration as you weigh approval for this project Sincerely. s„.Zicido&e. Diehard D.Vannoy /JNftlf (c_.' /az ,c3"-eL 921249 Ft. Lupton, Colo-. November 24, 1993 Weld County Commissioners 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado Dear Commissioners, In regard to the Del CaminoMinimum Security Pre-Release Facility may I make a few comments . There is a pressing need at this time to provide such a facility. It will help relieve the over- crowding in other detention facilities by freeing up 386 on a continuing cycle . Offenders need to know there is room n the system so they will not calculate a light ,'rntence because of over crowding. If we seriously intend to protect our citizens we must provide the tools necessary to accomplish this . The Villa appears to be a viable option, The Villa would give young offinders the opportunity to acquire educational and job skill training and give them a chance to become respon- sible citizens. This facility will not be a negative but will be an asset to the community. It will provide 110 jobs with a 3.5 million payroll. Del Camino community is a good location. Other facilities have proved to be assets to their communities with no negative aspect. I hartily agree with the planning boards recommendation and urge• you to vote your approval. Sincerely, ohn T. Martin of•CO/q saw * 4 44 a Logan County Courthouse P.O. Box 71 1876 ♦ Sterling,Colorado 80751 303 5224567 ;! ;= STATE OF COLORADO Logan, Phillips, — - - - - - Sedgwick Counties Morgan County Courthouse THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Yuma County Courthouse P.O. Box 130 P.O. Box 291 PROBATION DEPARTMENT Fort Morgan,Colorado 80701 Wray,Colorado 80758 303 867-8268 303 332-4024 Morgan,Washington Counties Kit Carson, Yuma Counties November 29, 1993 Weld County Board of Commissioners P. 0. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 RE: Del Camino Minimum Security Pre—Release Facility Dear Commissioners: I am the Chief Probation Officer of the 13th Judicial District, encompassing seven counties in northeastern Colorado. I have been Chief Probation Officer for the past ten years, and, prior to that, was a probation officer for an additional ten years, for a total of 20 years. Part of the concept of Community Corrections in Colorado, and the re-integra- tion of offenders back into the community, after sentences have been served, is not a new one, but one that has been in dire need of new approaches to Community Corrections in recent years. For many years, offenders were allowed to serve their sentences in the Department of Corrections, with the option to "max out", or complete their sentence with no integration phase built in, which then left offenders with no resources or community ties, or community programs in place, to facilitate their return without re-offending. The Del Camino Pre-Release Facility, if approved, would be a significant effort at preparing offenders who have been serving Department of Corrections sentences for their return to the community by providing educational and job skills training, and facilitating programs to be in place for the offender's release on parole into the communities from which they have been sentenced. In my opinion, this facility, and the programs within the facility, would be of great benefit to the citizens of Colorado, and I applaud the efforts of The Villa at Greeley, Inc. in attempting to have the facility approved, in light of the Colorado legislature's authorization for funding for such a facility in the past legislative sessions. Many of the offenders who will be processed through the Del Camino Pre-Release Facility would be from • tx 'bbf Till �� / ) 9u12,19 Weld County Board of Commissioners November 29, 1993 RE: Del Camino Minimum Security Page 2 Pre-Release Facility northeastern Colorado, thus, the impact would be direct on the seven counties of the 13th Judicial District for re-integrating offenders originally sentenced from the district to prepare for their release back to their respective communities. The 13th Judicial District, and the Morgan County Community Corrections Board, has had a contractual relationship for Community Corrections sentenced offenders, with The Villa at Greeley, Inc. , since 1984. The management personnel and staff of The Restitution Center, and The Residential Treatment Center, have always provided highly professional service in Community Corrections and in the supervision of offenders through the Community Corrections sentencing process. In addition, as a resident of Morgan County, Fort Morgan, Colorado, I live in close proximity to the High Plains Youth Center, a juvenile maximum security prison located in Brush, Colorado, which has operated for the past several years without incident. The facility houses approximately 170 high-risk youthful offenders sentenced for serious felony offenses from Colorado, as well as from other states and the federal government. This facility has operated with minimal risk to the community, minimal escapes, and has brought a considerable number of employment positions to the Morgan County area, with increased payroll and the resulting tax revenues. In summary, I support the concept for the Del Camino Minimum Security Pre-Release Facility, and support The Villa at Greeley, Inc. as the agency attempting to secure approval to operate the facility. I feel the benefits far out number the minimal impact the facility would have on the Weld County area near Highway 119 and I-25. If you need any further information, please contact me at the Fort Morgan office. Sincere � , 4 4LCtlItit Steven R. Proctor Chief Probation Officer Fort Morgan Office SRP:bjm 901249 Jack E. and Marjorie J . Edson 1482 Leisure World Mesa, AZ 85206-2307 • November 27, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 • Re : Proposed pre-parole prison facility near the Northeast corner I-25 and Colorado Highway 119 . To the Commissioners : My wife, Marjorie, and I own a 35 acre tract of commercially zoned land on the southeast corner of Weld County 7 and Colorado Highway 119 . We do not oppose the construction of the pre-parole prison facility, nor do we support it . Many of our neighbors have expressed strong positions both for and against the prison. Certainly providing a center in which prisoners learn to readjust to society is a valid social need . Assuredly the facility will provide added employment which will benefit the area economically. Whether it should be placed in a less populated area remains to be determined . On the other hand, we do not reside in the immediate area, and can understand the security and safety concerns of those who do. Many families with small children are no doubt worried about the type of inmates housed, as well as escape prevention administration . The parole board in Colorado does not exactly have an unblemished record when it comes to those it chooses to release . We would hope that the Commissioners, with their infinite wisdom, would balance all of the pros and cons in reaching an equitable conclusion. Sincerely, / Le/d4/af?"),,C...../ Jack E. Edson EZ/5/6/ / /<KKK CC ., PL; OD cc 9f1249 Barbara Kirkmeyer November 26 , 1993 Weld County Commissioner P .O . Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Deat Ms . Kirkmeyer , My name is Chris Foster , and with my husband Rick, we run a horse "hotel" . We have facilities for people traveling through the area with their horses . I recommend the hotels in Del Camino . I will not recommend those hotels if a prison is built across the interstate ! We have often stopped in Del Camino for dinner and are frequent customers at the truck stop. I can assure you, I will longer patronize those businesses , or recommend them. More importantly, I live approximately four miles from the proposed prison. Basically, nothing separates my home from the site . My neighbors and I are appalled ! My husband travels often, and I am alone with our 2 1/2 year old daughter . No thank you ! Please take my concerns into account . This is a lovely place to live . We love it here , and certainly do not want to move . Sincerely, (L:4 Chris Foster CR Livestock & Animal Care, Inc . 757 WCR 18 Longmont , CO 80504 9;21249 Exhih/f .LLLL de It, Ooc ,. . ter, . ,__:., . :•:.e,tniz:eeh C... i`-:Ciieb, . , .,..: 5410 WUF 3o r1aLl.eyilie. CO 6065.1. Nov emuer •... . J.V•l.._ ('is barCar•ca l:•.irF':fever weld County Commissioner P.O. 'pox 756 Gr"eeie'V. CO iS1_'i`+•..Y •. Commissioner K.lrkme'verJ The s i.nel e greatest to i nca the people aria commissioners o9• Weld County can oo to insure the economic development in Lei Camino :.end tr-le curr ot..rnoino area is to MAINTAIN AND F'RE5E:RVE THE E.AIs•fiNC QUALITY OF LIFE. To that end. to anur'ove the prison wnic::h The Villa ur•ouo is trying to inflict en us would be tantamount to souelc:hind the real estate boom that Southwestern Weld County is currently enicl•.-ino. rac_cor-•uina to The Villa. since 1 live acoroxiiriately three miles from the ar'oposed site i would be unaffected by the prison. Believe me. those Cii' us who live in Mead AND POINT'S FURTHER AWAY will oe very much affected uv this roro..ect. 1't you are unaware of the market activity 1!n the area. 1 would invite You to ori.ye down County Road 7 outside dead south to Highway 6e. Eoth sides of the road FOR THAT ENTIRE DISTANCE are under oevei.oiiment with three new suoaa visions. The r. . actu :. subdivision on the East side Wi .l. J. �1 J.y border l•__::.�. Head east on Highway ee and go two miles oast I-25 to County Road 13 and turn nor•'t:n. On the immediate right (East side) is Grandview Estates dev*3loement. Considering that this is a the ur_anl� ' _ ek:icii development . I find it somewhat intriguing that none of the people building In there to wnom 1 nave spoken were aware of the proposed orison. I guess "F"rison View Estates' didn t nave mute the same marketing appeal . I live two miles es north of this development. We our'cnaseu our home last summer after it baa been on the mar i<et a wnoi.e four hours. We barely peat: two other contracts to the table. A home ,vu yards west of us ::kilo in a matter cii weeks . despite the deplorable condition of the Nome. We receive monthly. and often weekly E:.F�: solicitationsa y solicitations to sell our Nome. Simi ar•- stories are tol ci and marveledn at thr euahout toe area. Our crlur'cii polat..l..I.ation iii r•1aacl has incr"easeo dramatically this year.. . Ai. i. these are tenuia1e sions that this ar'ea. i 3 a ciesir•'ab.le. Cxhif�r t/''1MMm 9;31249 cc;. /k, ,f364- actively t:!hOWi1`+I6 area. would this activity continue 2t,0t..tl.0 ea prison be Placed at wriat is essentially the '6atewav a' to Weld County? Do we really want such a +or"miaible structure looming next to the community that many travelers to ana through Weld County utilize for foo0 . rest . gasoline and other forms of commerce I patronize the businesses at. Del Camino on an almost ctaaily basis. My husband commutes to Denver daily. as do two of our net cinbor".s. Will they be a++er.:tcd :' You better believe it. W11 .1 they continue to use those businesses You oetter believe they won t. Weld County in ciener al . Southwestern Weld County IN F'AR'T iOUL.AR. la i deal I v 1 oc:aa•teci to read benefits from the Dooming real estate markets in Denver and boulder. We are attracting people because of the OUAI.....i. ( OF LIFE. These people have jobs. and are bringing their money HOME TO WELD COUNTY TO SPEND. Inc tax base i ncreases. Do youreally want to take a chance on stifling this orowtri :' You will hear arguments from supporter's 01 this oI o.:ect that we need 'Jobs" in this area . that these oeoplF will buy homes and oeveloo the area further . Get -a.sisde for a moment that Weld County has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the. State. Do yot1 really trinF. •_riat minimum-wage security workers. food service workers and lani't;.t:]r'irai personnel will be able to buy homes in tr11's area Homes in their price range don t exist. builders have no economic incentive to build homes in their price range because there 15 such a huge demand for the hioher'•••-dollar homes being built right now. The orison workers would commute TO the orison and take whoa r dollars AWAY from Weld County. Construction iobs '.temr1or"ary anyway? would be bid U J Local workers •-;t1'IL: no C.fC]l.1rJ'C. WON by out -•i::)f.._�:.'ilEs _clr.l?•_t contractors. wouldn t be hired . not in this day of commuting to the site. d1O you think the airoort workers moyeo to the iob site r' Service contracts would be awarded to the most ccmr]etitive providers. again . out-of-county contracts. Where is tne benefit to Weld County in all f)f tnisyt' increased taxes To be oft•""'set:. Oy the ii CkLri;:•ING or o'pert,y values of area homes and busi iies=.st::Si' Again. it must doesr1 t and up. Let a start actively ,:;0L.It.:l (lNl::1 iicial1t v ousine ses to come into this area. instead sit taking tne dregs that other areas iSrceicv. Windsor anu L_onamontb have air eapv turned down. t.is e'-'ic:lei'i "eth Dv the overwhelming 0000sit.i.on at the Planning ... s,W t residents . t..,a::.`.(lif'ril'�sli:ef'i meeting and i::.t'li::". thousands of signatures of r"f_ . E11Efl'C�a from this area. you are safe .in telling this Developer that voting sbO1•':t?fl , and that this orison is not in constituents have our best interest . or your": . `) � � .. Fa. r. fir. / � (. K129 November 30, 1993 - Weld County Commissioner's Office P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 To Whom It May Concern: I support the approval of the pre-parole facility that is proposed by the Villa at Greeley, Inc. (Villa). I feel compelled to write to you in order to express my unemotional, rational and informed opinion about the project. I've read the Greeley Tribune articles about the city council meetings and I watched the semi-hysterical, knee jerk reactions from the public. Emotional condemnations by people who are self-appointed experts about correctional facilities, although I doubt they have been inside the Villa or any correctional setting. I've read and heard their concerns and I am puzzled. There isn't any factual basis to their fears. I am comfortable making that statement because I have almost six years experience working directly with inmates in a correctional setting, I owned a home that was less than 1/4 of a mile from a correctional facility, and correctional education is one of my areas of expertise. My "informed" status is also due to the fact that I ask questions and investigate before I reach a decision. I will address the most common complaints that have surfaced regarding the development of the pre-parole facility. Dangerous people will be housed in the facility. I understand the population that could be eligible for residency are people who have been approved for parole. Their final acceptance for parole would be contigent upon their successful completion of the program intensive curriculum at the facility. These are people who are going to be released. If they receive training and skills prior to their reentry to society, their chances of successful reintegration is much greater. These are people who have no motivation to screw-up and every reason to participate in positive programming and abide by the rules and regulations of the facility. Dangerous people will move into the area and their families and relatives will want to live near the facility too. When they are released they will stay here. I know the Villa has a stipulation in their contract regarding transportation of residents. They are responsible for returning clients to the jurisdiction where the charges originated, which could be anywhere in Colorado. The only people who will remain in Weld County after they are released from the facility are the people whose cases originated here. This is a 90-day program. I don't know if families will want o move here, but I do know most newly released inmates just want to return to their home and family in an attempt to reestablish their lives. My property values will decrease. As I mentioned earlier, I lived very close to a correctional facility in Adams County. I never feared for my life or safety and there were no problems directly or indirectly related to my proximity to the facility. It is important to note the residents at this facility were persons arrested, tried, or convicted of serious offenses. These people had every reason to try to escape, cause problems and be disruptive because they had nothing to loose. Five years after moving into my house I sold it at a 12 1/2 % profit and this was before the recent increase in real estate prices. Even if this were a bh;bif /1/flN/V (c ' '6; 44)c_c_-- 921249 4J justifiable fear, I understand there is only one house (which is unoccupied) within a 1/2 mile radius of the proposed site. The Villa is planning to use the facility to help alleviate overcrowding in Colorado's prisons. It will not really be used as a pre-parole facility but will be converted into a more restrictive facility in the near future. I can't predict what the Villa or the Department Of Corrections (DOC) will do in the future. I did find out the contract is for a term of one year (which is standard) and may or may not be renewed. I am confident the professionals who operate the Villa will not make devious decisions regarding the safety and security of their staff, residents, or the public. The Villa is a business. It would be suicidal for a company that wishes to grow, to mislead the public regarding their intentions about their "product". Especially when is is scrutinized as rigorously as this project has been. The Villa has been providing an alternative to traditional incarceration for years and they've been successful. The company has demonstrated their professionalism, dependability, and willingness to meet the needs of the community and their clients. The DOC is selective about where inmates are housed and their approval is indicated by their acceptance of the Villa's bid. The Weld County Sheriff has endorsed the program too. Perhaps what is also just as important is the public demand for change and reform in the way in which we deal with criminals. The Legislature has respond to the wrath of the public by mandating stiffer sentences and by requiring parole. The Villa is offering to meet the demand by providing necessary services. I support the development of the pre-parole facility. I would like to live in a county that can and will adapt to the needs of its citizenry. I encourage you to thoroughly investigate all matters concerning the proposed facility. I also encourage you to base your decision upon facts and information, not fears and emotions. Sincerely, A (,tv .Sn-1-62 1 Susan Gearheart 931243 ConnectingPoint_ 2401 17th Street COMPUTER CENTERS - Cottonwood Square Greeley, CO 80631 (303) 356-7224 November 30, 1993 The Weld County Board of Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Ladies & Gentlemen: I am writing this letter to express my support of the proposed pre-parole detention facility to be located in the Del Camino area in southwestern Weld County. As a resident and business owner in this county, I feel that this project has a great deal of merit and will prove to be a benefit our area. I believe that the upside benefits far outweigh the potential downside risks. Personally, I feel that Greeley's decision to deny the pre-parole prison was influenced by the paranoid fearmongering few, as opposed to the rational majority of the citizenship. Greeley had a great deal to gain by approving the facility: economic diversity, new jobs into the economy and an opportunity to become a trailblazer in the privatization of our state's detention facilities. The decision made by Greeley's City Council just underlines the fact that sometimes Greeley is much more comfortable following the leadership of other towns than it is in trying to lead by innovation. Greeley's "Me Too" attitude often leaves the town on the outside looking in, while other towns on the front range are more proactive in the areas of economic growth. While I don't totally agree with the professor at UNC that claims that Greeley is a Monfort town, I do feel that our local economy certainly could use some more diversity. Those people who saw Greeley's economy suffer in the late seventies in the wake of the Monfort closing certainly became aware of just how much we rely on Monfort and its reiated industries. We could always use new industries and new opportunities to bolster our local economy. I think that pre-parole will provide many good jobs, contribute to the tax base, and perhaps most importantly help to reform prisoners so that they will become productive members of society. The arguments put forth by the opponents to such a facility just simply don't hold water. Will the residents of this facility really try to escape??? Absolutely not, unless their level of intelligence is so low that they don't realize that they will all be free 90 to 180 days from the date of their incarceration in this facility. Those who would argue against this facility seem oblivious to the fact that these prisoners would otherwise be released back onto the streets of our state. The prisoners will be set out into society without the benefit of the preparation and counseling that a pre-parole facility can provide. CM/bit-€.00009:1249 I also find that many government-run institutions and programs are not run nearly as efficiently as those run by private sector entities. I feel much better sending my tax money to Mr. John Coppom's pre-parole facility than to Governor Romer's Canon City. Privatization means good, efficient management that is run within government's expectations and fiscal guidelines. I feel that Mr. John Coppom has been loyal to our area almost to a fault. He has been rejected by Greeley, Evans and other municipalities in our county, yet I feel that he would be welcomed by other cities and counties that could really benefit from the jobs and economic impact of the proposed facility. Should you decide against approval of the pre- parole prison, we will find ourselves on the outside looking in at the areas that embraced the concept and flourished as a result of it. What was Greeley's loss could still be Weld County's gain. Our county can still benefit from the taxes paid and jobs provided by this new enterprise. With today's society as it is, I can't help but feel that privately run pre-parole facilities will be a significant growth area in our state for years to come. I think that Weld County should take a leadership role in welcoming Mr. Coppom's proposed facility. If it goes as well as I think it will, perhaps our county will be well positioned to welcome similar facilities in the future. I appreciate having the opportunity to voice my opinion on this topic and I hope that you will approve this facility for the good of our county and the state that we live in. Sincerely, Scott M. Gattis Owner/Vice President Connecting Point of Greeley CONNECTING POINT- GREELEY p 91&49 December 2, 1993 Dear Weld County Commissioners: • -� '' We the undersigned wish to register our disapproval of the building of the proposed Pre-Parole Prison faciliy otr any other facility of this kind in South west Weld County. - We are concerned that: 1. the decline of our property values. 2. we have good schools and churches, and a very desirable area for family living we are concerned that this will decline. 3. we have very expensive homes being built in new subdivisions. 4. statistics show that 60% of the inmates come from the Denver Metro Area. Why build prisons in our area? Why not Denver ' etro Area? 5. the possibility of undesirable visitors to the area. 6. the fear of additional crime in our neighborhoods when parolees are released. 7. the available access to I-25, residences, and businesses in the immediate area to escapees. 8. straining an already overworked Sheriff's Department. Again we, the Seniors Citizens and residents of the Mead area want to go On record as opposing the PreFarole Prison or any similiar facility in Southwest Weld County. We ,respectively request your NO Vote on the building of the facility. Si Meth l .t.C Ike• 7L .,- ,-- ,,t/.....,..., G,„,,,,� f , _,; . (, v7 y I �?I`yll�• J / '-f. ��'J!Y-l-7•�J� �� _ J�!J D'7 !„..., !.-•,5'..�� j ?rf,;(-7,4__ , ) ,--,..)....., , _ 4� b ,. 7 y ! �✓-- , 4 �k.,, /I i 4,'l—t'-4/4Y J :•L-.. ^` ..LU' i .,.C 1.tit . ,"� l�i,. yC� I'�<'f..(C�'l. f ^ . - 1 � Iy,��, s•-• I=".� 4 rL", �`._/F./, it'd"�%GP-' . � . !^ ./1_ C . `,.,.....c. . L/ *-----a7--7. et'--7:__.,ef (,)t.--,ei--,...„, _....: 7 k...., 1:17::%ft_ .26-1..e...,......,,1 !J ,_.-'1 44 .._ f, y /) -Y�('A, - dividual & Group Therapy Servic' = 800 8th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, Colorado 80631 352-6537 December 1 , 1993 Weld County Commissioners 915 Tenth Street L Greeley, CO 80631 RE: The Villa Pre-Parole Facility Dear Weld County Commissioners: I am writing this letter in support of the Villa and their Pre-Parole Facility project. It is my hope that the Weld County Commissioners will look at this project and see the merits that are in it. For the past eight years, I have been involved in working with offend- ers. During that 8-year period, I have seen the prison system provide less in rehabilitation effort and do more warehousing of prisoners. At the same time, I am very aware of the tight conditions that exist for the inmates, with double-bunking, and with facilities that have passed the maximum capability for housing them. A project such as the Pre-Parole Facility would be of great help to the State of Colorado. It is my hope that Weld County is willing to take a look at the help such a facility could offer in assisting inmates re- integrate into society. The reality is that almost every inmate who goes into the Department of Corrections will come out. Currently, what often takes place is that these inmates are given a $100-dollar bill and leave the facility. It appears to me that those who do not have support from families or the support of community members, are set up to commit more crimes. A facility such as is proposed is of minimum risk to the community and can be a great asset to released prisoners. It is my understanding this program is offering six hours of rehabilitation, to help educate the parolee to work on employment issues, vocational issues, job skills, and job interviewing. This type of program gives the parolee an opportunity to have better success toward re-integration than is currently being afford- ed. In my experience, parolees do not stay where they have been housed, but, upon parole, go back to the county from which they were sentenced. This often is because their families are there or they see better job opp- ortunities in a familiar area. At the time the Villa attempted to obtain land in the Evans area, I was a strong supporter of that effort. I do not see this facility as a risk to neighbors or to Weld County. The Del Camino location appears to be an excellent choice and I am confident that if accepted there, the spin-off benefits will far outweigh the fears now held by the people of that community. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions as I am very willing to share any information or ideas I may have. Sinc,rel . r A. Mervyn Davies,M.A. ,C.A:a.III f ).62tQQQ ec: !'� voc 1249 C ` 56 ., t� 0 to O ob0 U 20 a 0a nosa• co g .§ 0 •b m�. 4 rci»Z rove N `g3c .b000wc'Zc4� towm 30 I o o8 $.^ vioa2 S .6 00 so— 8.— a) A r+y o= a O tn2 N C P, a . H u at' 4 $ N u c u u V Ts 6'u'� d o d N H aWu. .b.„,w F N' o0 c. dLtm6Koa !0-d74 c zd IP a• 7c Ng0 WC WLti �.S4 Owb� y HIll to.bLo it Elb 14 u yC 5=�xp i' N WC E". w,u umml 7p� �.. ›,t4 s Vi (A N b V G ° 4. C O V �'0y.06 ypC ,C� O V V in 0 111 a'.:J � . 006. 0.2 p 0.0. co p. O N eVa V O..C7 Ct(130 P.W 00.:01 N E .0Cy_'0 el t 8� fifli x5.cir7 '$a oe w3 wha • o4 °go 0 ct W V \ t N• hop, N td p O FS o Goo V O O ecEl Ut X6,64.4 E U.om } 820 -•. .0. 03:3 . N/aJ;� N l V .M•..I ro• to•n Q cuC mac V 2''g Q N O. 0C464 t o 0 rc u or V 0 70.0 a)2$ .C .C, O A N.44) 049 N T 8 Ncti u u 0 01 "- tfD.- — V ucti .121,. 3o3°�-3lva', cvola3c� 2.)li O e*s tc f'in a.TA c..) y c •.. 0,4:s F R . N bc v o W" ai 46 a 3 o N _..t0. R L d Gu0 `.`'i' d 4:1 CO N C LP O S ai 2 0 m 1 A 'N b' O +'J y al m �.O Cw to . o z, Po 4,3 J G VJ -, Y Y �•� C Lr bV�y s 6Uwcv U U FA .�Ty .y•�.o x.0 0U:o 3 nt... e•0 C(;) CO) 0 6.�.�▪ 17�F.0O�yyU piel, u a) Z= G4V p N N.0 �.. tib �.+•� =N al O' L-7 �Paa .u.. �au+ O oa a� m0 ;4g „ a: � �w A mp 4-2aanoApr, 3m5 yacE -. 9,1249 UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO GREELEY,COLORADO 80639 12-1-93 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 , . ' Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners: I am writing in support of the building of a pre-parole center by the owners and management of The Villa. I supported the construction of this facility when it was proposed for Greeley and again when it was being considered for Evans. So that you do not get the impression that I am a "Not In My Backyard" person, you should know that one of the Evans site's would have been within a mile of my home. My support for this facility is based on my professional belief that it will be a safe and secure structure and program that will provide an important step in the release process for offenders being returned to society. I have been working, researching, and teaching in the area of criminal justice for over twenty years. I understand the fears held by members of the public regarding correctional facilities, but I firmly believe such concerns are unfounded and based on stereotypes rather than the facts. Those facts have been well presented by Dr. John Coppom and Mr. Mike Brand at the various public hearings on this matter. In addition to my professional beliefs, I am also supporting The Villa's efforts because of the great benefit that company has provided the University of Northern Colorado. The Restitution Center and the Residential Treatment Center have provided employment and internship opportunities for my students in the Sociology department. The internship opportunities are especially welcome since they help our undergraduates identify and solidify career choices while providing them an opportunity to get great experience suitable for their resume. I believe a pre-parole center in Weld County would even further enhance the opportunities UNC students will have for both internships and employment. In addition, the influx of corrections personnel into Weld County would benefit our community and classroom by bringing in new professionals to our neighborhoods and by providing guest speakers in our classrooms. In sum, I believe the proposed pre-parole center in Weld County will be a safe, secure, professionally operated, program and facility. I encourage you to base your judgement on facts rather than unfounded fears and support The Villa's application. Sincerely, Philip L. Reichel, Ph.D. ■t Professor of Sociology , QUALITY • DIVERSITY • PERSONAL TOUCH &G (f)MMII lI)F TO AFHRMATIVF Af I I()N AND L()UAL I)PI'(1RTINITY hl/J' e - gkRg. cc tz,, .l0OC .,,, , 9 DPOR FT COLLINS TEL : 303-226-6642 Der 3 .93 15 :05 No .010 P .02 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OP PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION North Region office 3842 B. Mason 0 202 f•� Port Collins, Colorado 80525 C'-'�- ti Phone (303) 226-6641 TAX (303) 226-0361 j srerE�P IV'I Roy Re Governorom r December 2, 1993 Laurie A.Mathews Director Weld County Commissioners 915 10th Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners: My staff and I recently met with Mike Brand and Dr. John Comppom of the Villa of Greeley, Inc. regarding our concerns about the proposed pre-release center near Barbour Ponds State Park. After a productive discussion I feel much more comfortable with the proposal and its impact on Barbour Ponds. Most of our concerns have been addressed and Villa of Greeley, Inc. is committed to working with us on any other issues which may arise. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify our original comments. Sincerely, c Joe Maurier Colorado State Parks North Region Manager xh�brt-s 555 ec ; /2‘) 13° CG DEC 3 ' 93 15: 08 303 226 6642 931249PFaG mEmORAnDUm T' Board Date December 3, 1993 COLORADO From Clerk to the Board Subject: Telephone call - The Villa on December 3, 1993, at 4:45 p.m. , Martin Deniston, Weld County Road 1, Longmont, telephoned to state his opposition to the pre-parole facility near Del Camino. His phone number is 776-3776. in- fie t %ill cc PZ tocc- 221 December- 3, 1993 Weld County Commissioners 915 10th Street Greeley, CO B0631 Dear Commissioners, This letter is in reference to the upcoming hearing regarding the Preparole facility proposed for Southwestern Weld. I do not feel this facility will enhance or is compatible with our community in any way_ I feel instead it will create problems, add extra tax burdens on the home owners in area, and cause further degradation in an area that can not stand any more. Once again the Southern part of the county is taking on Denver and Boulder's noxious uses. it is time this trend for noxious uses in the Southern part of the County is put to a stop. I think this facility will be better suited for Lowry Air Force Base or the soon to be vacant Stapleton, after all they are already constructed and have security systems in place. I do not believe this facility is compatible nor is it permitted in any of the Comprehensive Plans or Master Plans of the affected municipalities. The Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Dacono, Town of Firestone and the Town of Frederick concerning land use states: "Whereas, the municipalities desire to maintain the rural nature of certain geographical areas which now are characterized by agriculture, non-industrial, residential estate, and open space environmental integrity of those areas_' Under Land Use it states: "The municipalities agree to use their best efforts to maintain the character of the Area and the adjoining property which is now characterized by agricultural, non-industrial, residential estate, and open space land uses- The municipalities further agree, each to adopt as a part of their comprehensive plans, policies regulating noxious land uses-' Under Recreational and Environmental Planning it states: " The municipalities agree to cooperate with each other and other affected agencies and individuals in the planning of recreational opportunities within the Area and in planning to maintain and enhance the environmental integrity of the Area- This planning shall focus on preserving the aesthetic values and environmental integrity of the Area and restricting incompatible land uses which would have a detrimental effect on the recreational and environmental potential of the Area_' Under Development Referral it states: "Each 901249 municipality further agrees that each such zoning, rezoning, _ bli-• planned unit development, conditional or special use and de t ltait subdivision application proposal shall be compatible with the ,6,`13e rural character currently existing_' This facility is not consistent with the policies or Comprehensive Plans for this area. it is also in direct conflict with the Growth and Preservation Policy that is recognized by Weld County. Policy 6-4: "Any development which could endanger public health, safety, or welfare shall be discouraged. Policy Rationale: Due to the number of current and proposed uses that have the potential for a high negative impact on the region, the area cannot sustain further degradation." Policy C-6: "Access to a regional commercial use should not utilize local or collector streets which pass through existing residential areas." Policy C-7: " Regional commercial uses should be sited so that traffic levels do not exceed the capacity of existing streets." Policy C-9: "Commercial development should be compatible in intensity and scale with residential areas. Policy Rationale: In order to retain a sense of community, structures should be suitable in design and usage." Policy C- 10: "No change should be made through zoning or any other public action which would adversely alter a stable, firmly established, low-intensity residential area or community." Unfortunately this has already been done with the recent rezoning that took place for this piece of land. Policy RU-1: "Land in rural, unincorporated areas should be used primarily for agricultural purposes. Policy Rationale; The ability to offer an agrarian lifestyle, yet be in close proximity to the urban facilities and amenities of Denver, is one the study area's major attractions and should be preserved." And last but not least Policy RE-1: "Commercial development in residential areas should be of a service nature to the residents. Policy Rationale: It is essential for the residential neighborhood to have support services. As a commercial activity, these business foster a positive social community. Conversely, to preserve the integrity of the residential areas, commercial facilities which serve a regional population should be steered to locate in the the regional commercial/industrial zones." The Preparole facility is an untried idea. It raises to many what ifs. For instance what if it goes bankrupt? What happens if the State has the power to change the use? What if the Facility wants more money and the State refuses and pulls the contract? What if the criminal structure levels change and more volatile criminals are allowed in. This is a new concept in prisons and we will be the guinea pig. Other issues also arise Police protection for one. This area is a patch work quilt of unincorporated areas and small town police departments. The Weld County Sheriffs response time in this area in twenty minutes on a good day. The Sheriffs Department is very efficient for it's budget, but it does not have the budget to adequately cover this area with this type of facility. A twenty minute response time is unacceptable with the possibility of violent criminals escaping into the community no matter what they have been down graded to. The Villa down plays escapes using 9;:.12.19 ., the excuse the criminals are about to be paroled so why would they escape. �� Vet we are talking about unstable individuals. Who knows what will set them off after all they are in prison for reason. The burden of police protection will fall on the Tri-Towns and Mead. As far as I know only Dacono has a twenty-four hour police force and none of these towns have the financial resources to bear this burden. This means the tax payers would have to approve a mill levy increase for better police protection. The property owners in this area should not have to bear en increase in taxes for a Denver problem. This also bring to light EMT'S and Fire Fighters. These are volunteer agencies and with the increase of violent people in the area a paid twenty four force is a requirement. Again a burden on the tax payers. In additional how many of these volunteers should be asked to increase their risk to their own safety should there be a fire at this facility. (G & P Policy G-4, C-1). The Villa claims that This facility will have a positive financial impact on the area. It claims this is in a report prepared by Ann Garrison. After reading this report ! disagree. First the impact was studied on a city not on a rural area that can not provide services to this type of facility. The Villa will have to use food service vendors out of Denver. As they stated in front of the Planning Board the Majority of work force will be out of Denver. Other services to maintain this facility will have to come from Denver or Boulder or even out of state (6 & P Policy RE-1). Every presentation by the Villa has been different. The number of beds goes up and the number of employees goes down. This brings us to the building and than the operation of the facility and how it impacts the roads. If you multiply the number of employee going to work, leaving for lunch, coming back from lunch and than going home, plus food service delivery vehicles every day and other miscellaneous comings and goings such as 80 parking places for visitors plus lawyers, police officers, construction traffic, semi's, etc. you are looking at a major traffic problem. The intersection and roads at highway 119 can not handle any more traffic than it has now. Nor can the intersection at highway 52 or even I-25 between 7 & 66. These intersections and roads are already a threat to public safety and are past their capacity (6 & P Policy C-6 & C-7). The dirt residential roads in this area are used as race tracks and can not handle any more speed or dust. We don't need the Villa to bring us economic growth, one only has to look down I-25 and see that it is already here. Which bring up another question the Villa has had problems in the past because of a mall located nearby. The Factory Outlet Mall will only be two exits away. In the City of Greeley's minutes they stated that the Villa has also had an escape problem and when I asked the Villa about this I never got an answer. There is no set minimum stay in this facility, we could have thousands of criminals passing through a year. The visitation hours on Saturday and Sunday pose a problem. There will be one in the morning and one in the ,,, .19 afternoon. This has the potential for some undesirables to be hanging around looking for mischief between sessions and even all week-end. How will this facility and visitors affect Barbara Ponds directly across the highway. (Tri-Town I.G.A.) How will it effect already established business will there be more theft. I think this facility is in conflict with everything that Southwestern Weld and the Tri-Towns have been working towards. It brings nothing or gives nothing to community but fear and more tax burdens. It is another of Denver's noxious uses. it does not belong in an agriculture community it belongs in a city that can service it and provide 24 hour police, fire and EMT's. And still there is the uncertainty of how much power the State will have over the operation of and changes in this facility. Should this noxious use be allowed rrruch to everyone', protest, I think several guideline need to be set. Such as the Villa needs to pay for and maintain a police force, fire protection and EMT's full time to be governed by a board. The Villa needs to be governed by a board of five citizens of the community and two area police officers. This board will decide who will stay at the villa with absolutely no repeat offenders being allowed. A minimum stay will need to be set along with a rnaxirnurn stay and maximum number of beds. Under no circumstance will any releases be made in this area. Employees must live in Weld County. The visitation hours need to be cut to one session and one day. And last but not least the Villa needs to provide a service to the area. I think a tax of eight dollars per adult bed and fifteen per juvenile bed should be assessed to provide or improve. recreational facilities in the Tri-Town and Mead areas. After all the convicts will have them so why should the children and adults in the area not have them also. Maybe with recreational facilities for use in the area will keep the children from overcrowding our prisons in the future. This tax will help bear the recreational tax burden on the property owners and give something back to the community. Sincerely, )44-, Sandy Ingram 7201 Weld County Road 11 Longmont, CO 30504 1 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Corrections •1 -s - An Information Brief - 1 Issues in Siting Correctional Facilities 1 I 1 1 r 1 1 r r 1 I cc PL ' 64ca k9 1\111 , 1 Project Staff Adapted by Cindie Unger from Impact of Correctional Facilities on Land Values and Public Safety, completed by the Florida Atlantic University, Florida International University(FAU-FIU) Government Center for Environmental and Urban Problems. The following individuals contributed to the report: Kathleen Shea Abrams, Ph.D., Principal Investigator William Lyons, M.P.A., Co-Investigator Robert Cruz, Ph.D. — Alberto Dahbura, M.A. ' Lance deHaven-Smith, Ph.D. Paulette Johnson, Ph.D. Dwayne Kay Larry Kastancuk, M.P.A. Kim Marlow, J.D. Amick Trottier Martin, B.A. Jay O'Callaghan, B.A. Robert Patterson, M.P.A. Linda Radford, Ph.D. Renee Ross, M.P.A. Richard Scher, Ph.D. Project Coordinator: John Moore, MC Prisons Division _ I ll IL Preface The siting of correctional facilities is a critical issue across the country. Despite ongoing construction of correctional facilities, most states and many counties continue to fall short of meeting the need for new bedspace. Community acceptance and cooperation are vital ingredients to successful facility siting and operations. We must learn better ways to manage public opposition because we can expect that the future will hold more, not fewer, decisions about where to locate correctional facilities. In 1987,the FAU-FIU Government Center of the Florida International University completed a study of the impact of correctional facilities on land values and public safety. Funded by the National Institute of Corrections, this study investigated the popularly held notions that the presence of a correctional facility in a community creates a risk to public safety, lowers nearby property values, and diminishes the community's quality of life. The study findings refute these commonly held beliefs. The study found that correctional facilities have no negative effects on property value, public safety, or the quality of life. Conversely, the study found that correctional facilities had important positive effects on the local economies. Perhaps most important, the study concluded that an agency's ability to site a correctional facility appears to be directly related to its ability to effectively manage public opposition. This Brief provides an overview of the study's findings and presents strategies for better managing the process of siting correctional facilities. It was written for correctional administrators, planners, public relations staff, and others responsible for facility siting. We are pleased to make this publication available to the corrections community. iv 921249 Introduction The siting of facilities needed by society but unwanted by its members is not a new problem. In ancient times leper colonies were forced outside city walls or away from established paths and roads. In the late 20th century, the siting of correctional facilities is a critical issue across the country. From 1978 to 1991, the nation's inmate population grew by 77%, adding 349,638 inmates to state and local correctional facilities.' Tougher laws, more rigorous enforcement, and longer sentences all contributed to the increase. During 1990 alone, 23 corrections agencies added 62 new institutions.' States and counties have an ongoing need for additional bedspace despite having spent billions of dollars on prison construction during the 1980s. The nation's recent experience with the growth of inmate populations and the resulting overcrowding ensures that the future will hold more, not fewer, decisions about the locations of correctional facilities. The war on crime that began in the early 198Os ensures that prisoner populations will remain high in the foreseeable future. Difficulties in siting a much needed correctional facility led one beleaguered director of corrections to lament, When you start a war on crime, it's easy to hire more cops, more judges, and more prosecutors, but it takes three years to build prisons. Instead, you have to go begging for money and then get beat up by the community where they (legislators) want to put it. It's not an easy job. This Information Brief highlights the findings of a study designed to investigate a major issue related directly to the shortage of inmate housing: the impact of a correctional facility's presence on the community where it is located. People's perceptions of the impact determine whether they will tolerate a correctional facility in their community or fight against it. For many states and counties, all of the easy siting decisions have already been made. What is now needed are approaches to help these jurisdictions manage public opposition more effectively. The Brief documents the positive and negative, objective and subjective impact of correctional institutions on local communities, and also suggests ways to lessen negative effects. By identifying and evaluating the impact of correctional facilities on local communities, the positive effects may be revealed and a basis provided for the elimination or mitigation of negative consequences. The need for this type of information stems from the recognition that siting correctional facilities is a critical task most correctional agencies, by their own admission, do not perform ' Kathleen Maguire and Timothy J. Flanagan, eds., Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1990. Washington,DC:U.S.Department of Justice,Bureau of Justice Statistics,U.S. Government Printing Office, 1991. 2 George M. Camp and Camille Graham Camp, The Corrections Yearbook 1991. South Salem, New York: Criminal Justice Institute, 1991. 1 9431249 very well. Correctional facility site selection is an emotional issue for the public at large. To effectively site a facility, correctional agencies must be armed with information about the positive effects the facility will have on the surrounding community and strategies for countering any negative effects. Corrections officials must stage a public,relations campaign to win the confidence of the community. • Siting a correctional facility is a difficult, often thankless task, even under the best of circumstances. Without the support of the public, it can become an impossible task. A correctional agency's design and use of a process that anticipates and responds to public concerns can help determine whether those concerns become a solid wall of opposition or a door that opens for mutual benefit. Study Methodology and Findings Impact of Correctional Facilities on Land Values and Public Safety investigated the popularly held opinions that the presence of a correctional facility in a community creates a risk to public safety, lowers nearby property values, and reduces the community's quality of life. Specifically, the study looked at how correctional facilities across the country affected their respective communities': • Property values. • Public safety. • Economy. • Quality of life. • Law enforcement capabilities. To identify successful strategies for siting correctional facilities and strategies that could be adapted to correctional facility siting, the study also looked at state programs for siting controversial public facilities ranging from prisons to group homes and low-income housing to landfills and hazardous waste facilities. What facilities were selected for study? The facilities selected for study were: • Ada County Jail (Idaho). • Arizona State Prison Complex - Perryville. • Brevard Correctional Institution (Florida). • Dade Correctional Institution (Florida). • Durango Detention Facility (Arizona). • Federal Correctional Institution - Memphis (Tennessee). • Hillsborough Correctional Institution (Florida). 2 921249 How were these facilities chosen? The seven facilities were selected to represent a range of facility types located in populous counties across the country. Other criteria included: • Construction of the facility from six to ten years prior to the study. • Facility location within one to two miles of residential areas. • Availability of computerized property value data. How did the study determine that the correctional facilities did indeed impact the communities where they were sited? For each facility, the study defined a target area and a control area. The target area was defined by a circle, several miles in diameter, drawn using the facility as its center. The control area had comparable demographic features with one exception: no correctional facility. By defining a target area and a control area for each facility, the study could then identify and evaluate any similarities or differences between the two areas. Statistically significant differences would suggest that the correctional facility had impacted the surrounding community. How did the study assess the impact of correctional facilities on property values? It is important to remember that location is a key element in determining land value. The relative locational value--that is, the proximity of a land parcel to other parcels and the linkage between them--is the primary factor that determines the land's overall value. Proximity to desirable features generally increases a parcel's value, whereas proximity to undesirable features generally decreases its value. The impact of prison proximity on property values was assessed by examining the changes in property values in the areas surrounding the seven correctional facilities. Regression techniques were used to measure the relationship of the dependent variable--the price of the residence--to the independent variables: lot size, location, age, size, condition, and other amenities such as a garage, fireplace, den, and so forth. Resale values for residences in the target and control areas both prior to and subsequent to facility construction were compared. The target and control areas were matched for selected demographic characteristics. The investigators also sent an eight-item mail survey to realtors in the communities surrounding the facilities. The survey asked questions about the local residential housing market, property values, and concerns of potential home buyers. Realtors were asked to compare sales activity, property values, and buyer concerns within a three-mile radius of the correctional facility with those from an area located farther from the facility. They were also asked to rate, on a scale ranging from always to never, how often potential buyers had expressed concern over the presence of a correctional facility. 3 931249 How did correctional facilities affect residential property values? The impact of the correctional facilities on property values in the seven target areas was generally consistent. Over several years, sales prices for residential property in the target areas were not significantly different from those in the control areas. One exception was howlh- income target area near the Arizona State Prison Complex at Perryville (ASPC-P), where property values occurred in the third of three years studied. Regression results indicated that location had a negative effect on the price of a house in this area, lowering the average value by about $18,000. Factors unrelated to the prison (e.g., zoning changes, natural boundaries, overabundance of rental property, and lack of owner care) may account for this finding. Yet it is also possible that persistent public opposition to the facility may have depressed the residential property values in this affluent area. Of the 79 realtors responding to the survey, most believed that the presence of the facilities in their communities had little or no negative effect on sales price. Further, most realtors did not believe that sales activity was adversely affected by the presence of a ortcorrectional or more y Only two realtors--from Boise, Idaho, and Memphis, Tennessee--rep losing on potential buyers specifically because of the facility. How did the study measure the impact of correctional facilities on public safety? The risk to the public was evaluated by examining: • The security system and procedures designed to prevent escape and facilitate recapture at each correctional facility. • The involvement of law enforcement agencies and correctional facility staff in responding to escapes. • The number of escapes and recaptures. • Crime-related• Crime rates for the etarget areas compared to those t that inmates' visitors may have had on the local community. for the control areas. To provide a fair basis for comparing the crime rates between the control and target areas, they were matched for four variables: • Mean household income. • Percent of residents in same house since 1975. • Percent of government workers. • Percent of male residents aged 15 through 24. These variables were selected for specific reasons. Mean household income was chosen as an indicator of socioeconomic status because: 1) there is a high positive correlation between income and other important of substantially disparates such as income levels mightrfeel differently about ent and educational achievement,or and 2) people correctional facilities, based on factors having little or no relationship to physical proximity to the facility. Percent of residents in the same house since 1975 was chosen as an indicator of the area's degree of transiency. It was hypothesized that more transient people might feel differently about the presence of a correctional facility in the community than less transient people. Percent of government workers was chosen because government-employed residents might feel differently about government facilities such as state correctional institutions compared with 4 921249 privately employed workers. Percent of male residents aged 15 through 24 was chosen in order to match areas that have comparable percentages of residents in the age range with the highest crime rate. How did the correctional facilities impact public safety? With one exception, analysis revealed either: 1) no significant difference between the crime rates for the target and control areas, or 2) the crime rate in the target area was significantly lower than in the control area. Examination of the target area that experienced a higher crime rate revealed that this result was due to factors other than the presence of the correctional facility. When compared to the control area, the target area was found to be more urbanized, with more commercial property and shopping centers, factors usually associated with higher rates of crime. Average escape rates varied from a low of 1 per year to a high of 12.3 per year. Recapture rates varied from a low of 50% to 100%. Escapes did not pose a significant threat to the personal safety of the residents near the correctional facilities. The most serious crimsist e committed in the neighboring communities by escapees was car theft, presumably Y getaway. The law enforcement officers surveyed about the impact of the correctional facilities on public safety stated that, in their opinions, the correctional facilities had not contributed to community crime rates. Not one of the 15 law enforcement officers interviewed reported having heard about crimes committed in the community by inmates' visitors. While a small minority of visitors had committed crimes inside the facilities by attempting to bring in contraband, these incidents did not seem to have a larger, direct negative effect on the local community. How did the study measure the impact of correctional facilities on the local economy? As a general rule, investments in communities have positive economic impact on local business activity, employment, and personal income. The effect on the local economy stems from the expenditures required to establish and maintain the new operation. Direct sources of impact are payroll and the intermediate products and services that are purchased from local producers and suppliers. In addition to the direct demands for labor and other business services that emanate directly from the new activity, the additional income generated locally leads to secondary increases in local demand and business activity through its impact on household income and spending patterns. Consequently, the initial or direct effect on local household income becomes magnified, or multiplied, through o gh subsubsequently in tly i u induced wending. The size of the final impact may be estimated by applying g rs. The multipliers used in this analysis were provided by the o d income Department m of Com given erce "Regional Input-Output Modeling System II" (RIMS-II). by this model are used to estimate the total change in local income resulting from each additional dollar expended to build and/or operate a facility in an area. Any economic impact from these facility-related expenditures fall into one of five categories: • Non-wage construction expenditures. • Construction payroll. • Non-wage expenditures for facility operations. 5 pp pp .JtRei 9 • Correctional facility payroll. • Community service projects performed by inmates. The RIMS-11 multipliers generate impact estimates that indicate the overall change likely to occur without indicating the time period in which the change-will occur. That is, the model calculaes itude wht mpacttwillhoccur uringn s the first year of perationf the impact. It ,tthetsecond specify earao of the total and soforth. How did correctional facilities affect the local economy? The relative impact of correctional facilities on household income and employment was determined using a ratio between two sets of factors: the size and economic growth rate of the community, and the magnitude of a facility's construction and operational expenditures for payroll, goods, and services. The magnitude of the effect depended upon the ratio of facility expenditures to the size and economic vitality of the community. All of the correctional facilities had a positive effect on the local economies. But the impact was greatest for large facilities with correspondingly large expenditures that were located in less urban or in slow-growing communities. Even in fast-growing communities, however, a correctional facility can have a substantial positive impact if its expenditures are sufficiently large. A small facility with a limited budget has a less noticeable effect on a large, thriving community. Three of the seven facilities had a substantial positive impact; four had a lesser impact. The economic impact was calculated for each of the five economic impact categories previously identified. Comparative data for all seven facilities were provided for: • The relative impact of construction on household income. • The relative impact of construction on employment. • The relative impact of operations on household income. The data showed, in 1985 dollars, profound economic impacts on the local communities. The increase in local household income directly attributable to facility construction ranged from $3,900,000 in Boise (Ada County Jail) to $84,700,000 in Phoenix (ASPC-P). Increased employment due to facility construction ranged from 287 persons in Boise to 7,958 persons in Phoenix. Facility operating expenditures increased local household income by $1,800,000 in Boise and by $22,600,000 in Phoenix. Further, the initial, or direct, impact on local income also becomes magnified or multiplied through subsequently induced spending. As an example, in the communities studied, each $1 of operating expenditure added from $1.50 to $1.97 to household income. The highest values occurred in those areas having facilities with the highest proportion of payroll costs to total operational costs. Inmates at many correctional facilities provide labor services throughout the communities where they reside (e.g.,janitorial,landscaping, general maintenance). To estimate the economic benefit communities gain from these services, the number of labor hours worked were valued at the wages that otherwise would have been paid for these services (usually minimum wage). In 1983, inmates provided community services at four of the facilities studied. Their services were valued at: 6 91£2"19 • $256,242 - Brevard Correctional Institution. • $285,440 - Dade Correctional Institution. • $89,914 - Hillsborough Correctional Institution. • $634,577 - Arizona State Prison Complex-Perryville. How did the study measure the impact of correctional facilities on the public's perception of quality of life? While quality of life may be a difficult and nebulous concept to define, its importance to a community deserves close attention. The body of literature relevant to prison siting suggests that subjective (or psychological) responses are more powerful than objective impact in explaining community resistance to the siting of a correctional facility. To assess public concerns and fears, a representative sample of residents located near four facilities studied--Shelby County, Tennessee; Maricopa County, Arizona; Ada County, Idaho; and Dade County, Florida--was surveyed by telephone, using random digit dialing. The sample size ranged from a high of 419 in Ada County to a low of 334 in Maricopa County. The sample was equally divided between the target and control areas. The subjects were matched on the basis of four key demographic characteristics--mean household income, average length of residence, percent of government workers, and percent of male residents aged 15 through 24 years. The survey assessed levels of satisfaction, attitudes, knowledge, and feelings about living near a correctional facility. To assess the possible relationship of media coverage and public attitudes toward correctional facilities, an analysis of print media coverage of four facilities was done to augment the surveys. This type of analysis lends an additional dimension to understanding the response of community residents to the correctional facilities. How was the quality of life affected by the presence of correctional facilities? The majority of respondents (50% to 75%) believed the safety of their neighborhood was not adversely affected by the presence of the correctional facility. Slightly greater numbers (78% to 94%) believed that their neighborhood's quality of life had not declined. However, specific questions about the correctional facility brought out responses reflecting a general attitude of tolerance, not approval. In the case of one community with a state prison, significantly more target area than control area respondents reported that the facility was a disadvantage to the community. When respondents were told about the facility's positive contribution to the local economy and were asked again to weigh the facility's benefits to the community against its disadvantages, their responses showed a general trend toward a more positive view of the facility. One community reported that the county jail was an advantage. Another community reported that the facility was a distinct disadvantage; this facility had been sited against vociferous local opposition and unsuccessful legal and political challenges to its location. The siting of this particular facility involved legislative debates, community debates, and negative media coverage concerning the facility's location and potential impacts. The media coverage analysis found that, for two of the four facilities studied, a majority of news articles during the siting phase reported controversies about site selection; during the operations phase, a majority of articles reported escapes, overcrowding, and management problems. For the other two facilities, both county jails, news coverage of siting was limited 7 9x1249 and reflected little or no controversy. Nonetheless, the coverage of facility operations at the jails reflected overcrowding, threats to inmate safety from inmate attacks, and management and administration problems. For all of the facilities studied, a minority of news articles reflected more positive themes, such as accounts of volunteers' assistance with educational or religious programs for inmates. How did the study evaluate the effect of correctional facilities on local law enforcement agencies? Local police officials were asked whether the presence of a correctional facility in a community places an extra burden on the local and state law enforcement agencies. They provided opinions during structured interviews or in writing. What were the perceived impacts of correctional facilities on local law enforcement? The 15 law enforcement officials interviewed about the impacts of correctional facilities on local law enforcement identified several positive aspects of having a correctional facility in the local community: • Cooperative agreement for handling emergency situations (e.g., fires, disturbances, or escapes). • Services provided by trusties. • Employment. • Availability of temporary housing for local inmates in the event of an emergency. None of the law enforcement officials interviewed could identify any specific negative consequences of having a correctional facility in the jurisdiction. 9312.19 National Institute of Corrections Advisory Board Jo Anne Barnhart Norval Morris Assistant Secretary for Children Professor and Families University of Chicago Law School Department of Health and Chicago, IL Human Services Washington, DC Barry J. Nidorf Chief Probation Officer Norman A. Carlson Los Angeles Probation Department Senior Fellow Downey, CA Department of Sociology — University of Minnesota Donald Omodt Stillwater, MN Sheriff Hennepin County John E. Clark Minneapolis, MN -- Attorney-at-Law San Antonio, TX John A. Prescott Chief, Retired Lynne DeLano Kennebunkport Police Department Secretary Cape Porpoise, ME South Dakota Department of Corrections J. Michael Quinlan Pierre, SD Director Federal Bureau of Prisons Newman Flanagan Washington, DC District Attorney — Suffolk County Gerald P. Regier Boston, MA Acting Administrator Office of Juvenile Justice and Honorable Carol Pavilack Getty Delinquency Prevention — Chairman Washington, DC U.S. Parole Commission Bethesda, MD Judge William W Schwarzer Director Assistant Attorney General Federal Judicial Center Office of Justice Programs Washington, DC Washington, DC Paul V. Voinovich Susan Humphrey-Barnett Cleveland, OH Anchorage, AK Southwest Weld County �♦�♦� • • • • Economic Development Group • • • • • • S December 3, 1993 CLJ-' Weld County Commissioners 915 Tenth Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Board of County Commissioners : SUBJECT: pre-Release Correctional yaciiity On behalf of the Southwest Weld County Economic Development Group, I am writing this letter in support of the pre-release correctional facility to be located near Del Camino. The Group strongly urges the Board of County Commissioners to approve the location of this facility at Del Camino. The mission of the Southwest Weld County Economic Development Group is to provide, facilitate, and promote the development of an economically viable, mixed use area along Interstate 25 . We believe this facility will make a major contribution to the economic vitality of the area. In that regard, the Group is firmly in favor of the facility as proposed by the Villa at Greeley, Inc . . We believe that the proposed facility is compatible and consist- ent with the I-25 Mixed Use Corridor as established by the Coun- ty. The facility will be well served by the existing Del Camino Interchange with Interstate 25 . No new infrastructure in roads, sewer, water, or electric will be required. The facility will nicely complement the existing commercial, food, fuel, and hotel services at the Del Camino Plaza. The facility' s commercial nature is consistent with the County' s planned use and zoning criteria. The facility will be an asset to development in the future. It will be housed in an architecturally attractive building that will enhance the appearance of the area. The operation of the facility will produce no odor or environmentally hazardous by- product. The operation will be quiet and non-pretentious. It will not generate excessive traffic or congestion for the inter- change. G / . �1 c4eD ,w52$North Main Street • Longmont, Colorado 80501 • (303) 776-5295 921249 Southwest Weld County • • • • • • Economic Development Group • • • • • Board of County Commissioners Page 2 December 3, 1993 Finally, the facility will create up to 110 new jobs . The salary range will be between $15,000 . 00 and $65,000 .00 per year. We believe this will be an excellent employment opportunity for the residents of Southwest Weld County. In summary, we believe that this is a progressive opportunity to contribute to Weld County' s diverse economy. It will benefit the County' s tax base, per capita income, and employment. It will showcase a multi-million dollar investment along Weld County' s blossoming I-25 Corridor. I urge your approval of this facility on December 8, 1993 . Sincerely, SOUTHWEST WELD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP Kil ktLek Bill Meier Chairman BM/cs 528 North Main Street • Longmont, Colorado 80501 • (303) 776-5295 9212.19 neat. 52L4.; l y,aI 3 crwz Azoaae, cQ l,,o..d 4a-L cl ,ye-*f o,.6-vktfr C9:41/4, oGo _'t,.a.,,.E-"5eC., ,tjAa 4r ax crwL .../w,,,igl,. Ovv - /R /Q cm Jae Lt -EA:titer, 1 ..e_ rt. :—,{z ;,e-- ak r,e_ , Li 355 Ito, XII /e- L.on9 in o n+ (-D, 6O SO y mr- J • glib;f YYYY cc : Aacc J-44 p €.ctt- 9 l v-- ?Meats a " /i ' r Put - a: .e a'1.. k cc,}^_Yz 11OU-5�_ ..�. C�rftz'< i(-a bails,t/L- tail e- pct 5— O 4frf if- 5°mt.-,62 clydat Sofa. titio r1. II cicown ax-e., havcs S p c Ling . o tfi x pr€ .5 , 69 4- M(4se: le , vei„. ip es, fy le.e. ,--,;,• i-,, corcie 7L9.e- 43 if35.5 tib, a\ 4o\)% ,niter;f"XXXX Loh mat, , €' 4 i 13, PL j daces 921249 • • • •a + `•-l� r 4 .. ,t.:' ..w ti ,'.4:: .•<,{4�' �`•.�. is dk ertL44 kpb-' C? ...y ._ s. ' • • r.ria •,• ,,,,,, . , . 3> - - ' :".1:1_ , .. , ---- - ai31 . 71 ...1 .- • . : : 1:''.- .. '.--- ' .._a . , ... ..--...._ • ..-......_ .. • ' ....:,.,41,eic,. .-- -- ., ........ .. . . . . . . • , ..... . .. . .. .. ..•. . . • ... ,.. .. .. • . . . .. . .. ,, .. . ......... . • ..• • , ......• _ .... .. . .,....:i ..-:.-..•.,:. .. t , , . .,. • ••_...„ . • ,.. .-. ...--; ,, ..... .. . .. . . , .. .1.. .. ... .. .. .. 1164L. . ,,, ,,... . • .. .. . . , . . .. • ' 11 ... • .. .,,t; ° ? .., . �. ... ,.. .. .. . ,. .. .... . • ...„1 ,.:„..0. . "�' d' .+�..„: . •.__. .. - , -:._ ,. c . ,.._, _____IrL. . .. . . . .. . : .,..: . . ., . . . . , . .. .. , . . ,. . • ................_ • .,. . .. ... . • 14-141t--- _ _... .... ._ ______. . ..._, .. ts 's b .et.Z) _ td.uj.I.‘ . / .__ . _A. .% 92.1!..219 cp , a dOl. rc iiil la/0 �; - , - 11 ' *�� fit �.' l �4 o oise, lea, 1)4,wheist IE._ wed b U� i-' lgtAbs� , . _ . • �`� rim. : I i - -- ,r, ! '` -:t. , Fit .� �.astit,m-i w a_: 1. t i% . _(X._tti { --.E4''‘',101. �A. £ �..:. lam.. F .4,'..4,.,' s( . 1. max. 222.-2931249 - 2- w}' G 4' . }_alliiilig/Nt ___ b Apia.. rata, . _.�. .. _ _ ip _ _I lizttitin _Lk in attgoe .) • „,.-1 .t)ix,g_ arIttr . W . _ahlidittrt,_ .1 ____. ---- kitiLii:cis .._ Amait. . , , -- ., ,,,,,,v• ...... _ , , ___ 2, , ., _ _ -- . Dmiliwt. i - "nn, ,„ „„ tivitme. —, ,..A „,,, a- . , ,, „,„,, ___ ..),,,t. 4,,,,,„ ._ _Acititi3t, i,._,.ii).--, t. A 1.44-- 4 1 .e-=— , - , '.t. ihii.L.,, prife,,,, ,,,A, Jag. _'� - � f 1te Sri 1 a yip a `� 4; k f m'it1 a„ry fig + "s dnrt� • •.. ,may .., F•' _r'.' '°:fi, ,� +k r l- -i'it, . ..!. .: 4--446-, ul.,,,et 7"1 ' i''::alitiZir.RIn --- -.may. f 1 what • •Walkiti ...f:A01 . -- S •+� - t Y. i • .. i • • •.:�..: •r fi:.f,r:bMlPr:.vnear.•rw•ter`_ • tr._ ..4,,,, 4),,: , .,-„t . , aF °;.*. _ .. •Y o„ .:::, •'Y.. . _. 5EEE t,1.. '` L; :,,";' - -d.,•. t--X. Z.2 - 9j- 1249 - 44 - dailM 1,IIMMINIIMS IT:" ti,, l'i. ' 41 ' .6 kl---- ._ ..,.--. _ -- -,1-. ,(2, ::.-: ,Th , 7---- _ .-- (-1 „, :, in ._,..- :----. .4: „4- (..:)9) te 5c -m - ; a g :$) _-_,, ..i -to- ter-, /\^ . g / 1✓1JJ : l 931249 5 i.i _i ;alt i1 f;tifl(i IHI F'„if.! Phelps-Tointon, Inc. December 3, 1993 Weld County Board of Commissioner P.O. Box 758 Greeley CO 80632 SUBJECT: Del Camino Minimum Security Prerelease Facility Dear Commissioner: I encourage you to approve the Del Camino Minimum Security Prerelease Facility at your hearing on December 8, 1993. Many months ago I had the opportunity to dig into the facts and figures about this facility when the developers came to me with the idea of placing the facility in Evans, at the Platte Industrial Center. I studied the issue in some depth, because I had a concern that it might negatively impact the value of the balance of the land in the Industrial Park. I concluded that this would be a relatively unobtrusive facility and few people would even notice that it was anything different then an industrial facility. Since their clients are only 90 days away from being released, there is zero incentive for them to misbehave or try to escape . I discussed a possibility of the facility being located in Evans with two other property owners in the Industrial Park. Once they had reviewed the facts they concluded that they were not concerned about it being located nearby. Fort Collins built a jail on the east side of town about ten years ago, which our company manufactured and installed the detention equipment. At the time it was constructed there were no other buildings nearby. If you drive by there today you will see that considerable development has occurred near this facility. Property values have increased. I understand that people react very emotionally to any detention facility. Yet this emotional reaction is not consistent with the behavior of people that live and work near them after the facilities are up and running. For example your office is in the same building as the county jail . There is a need for the facility and I believe that the facts support that it will be a good neighbor. Sincerely) PHELPS-•3` N N NC. Robert G ointo President 5-xdli CC; .` /3Z; ' 9331243 4v7 ,'Pry # M State Representative * 4876 ASSISTANT MINORITY LEADER PEGGY KERNS Member: 1124 S.Oakland Street t_!__. COLORADO Agriculture, Livestock and Natural Aurora,Colorado 8009 R, : - : Resources Committee Home:696-7178 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Hotline:369-5605 Criminal Justice Committee Capitol:866-2919 STATE CAPITOL Audit Committee gs DENVER 80203 December 3, 1993 Weld County Board of Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Commissioners: As chair of the state's Criminal Justice Commission, I am writing to express the Commission's support for the pre-parole facility proposed for the Del Camino area of Weld County. As you are aware, this is not a prison. The purpose of the proposed facility is to prepare offenders for the transition from the corrections system to their home communities. The need for a facility of this kind was recognized by the legislature several years ago and was authorized in an omnibus crime bill enacted approximately three years ago. Since that time, the proposal to locate the facility in Weld County has undergone extensive review by many in the law enforcement community, the Criminal Justice Commission, the Governor's office, the Joint Budget Committee and the Office of State Planning and Budgeting. All agree that this facility, which is important to the public safety of all Coloradans, poses no risk to residents of Weld County. Security was a prime consideration in designing the facility and also in selecting a company to operate the program. In fact, the company selected has an excellent track record in operating the non-secure community corrections facility in Greeley. Similar facilities have been constructed in other states and there have been no incidents of endangerment of the public. In fact, most of the communities in which these facilities are located look upon this as an industry that enhances their financial base. The Del Camino facility is projected to employ 101 people during construction and 138 people once it is operational. The annual opera tions payroll is budgeted at $1.4 annually, with a total estimated economic impact of $4.8 million. We strongly urge your support of the facility when the issue comes before you on December 8. Sincerely, PegiyiICeYns State Representative � 6 6n6bB c c: /'L 434(C 931249 0 CENTURY HOUSING Division of CanAm Industries Inc. "The New Century in Housing" November 28, 1993 Weld County Board of Commissioners P. O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Proposed Del Camino Minimum Security Pre-release Facility Dear Commissioners: I have been following the news reports concerning the Villa' s attempt to develop a minimum security pre-release facility. My interest in his project began nearly six months ago at which time we owned the Fort Lupton Canning Co. , property and were interested in selling or developing it for some other use. But before I was able to make contact with the Villa concerning the possibility of developing the property for a use such as the release center we were successful in selling the property. Since that time I have continued to follow the progress of the proposed location for the facility near the Del Camino Center and just recently was able to meet the owners of the Villa. I have noticed per the Greeley Tribune that residents, not only near the proposed facility but even as far away as the Tri-town area and farther have developed a very negative attitude toward this project. This attitude appears to have been born out of exploited, unwarranted fears and disregard for facts and the truth about this facility. I need to make it clear that I have no involvement in this project but as a business person located in south Weld County and employing one hundred and twenty five people I am concerned that all business opportunities and service to our society is given a fair chance. My wife and I have lived in Brighton, Co. , for 4 1/2 years within five blocks of the Adams County Detention Facility. This facility is a 288, 000 square foot complex built in 1985 which serves an average daily population of 550 inmates. They have booked in approximately 13,000 unclassified inmates who have been arrested for every type of crime from the most serious and violent crimes to misdemeanors and traffic offenses. An elementary school is located one block from the detention facility. Across the street is a shopping center and office 931249 P.O. Box 450 • 1011 East 14th Street • Fort Lupton, CO 80621 • (303) 857-6684 • FAX (303) 857-6686 thchibi t- C-6'C" ' cc : /72 Baca building complex, and a Senior Citizen alternative care facility. There have been no safety or compatibility concerns in regard to the proximity of the detention facility to the school or businesses. New homes in the $150,000 range are being built within two or three blocks of the facility and land values have not been adversely affected. A few months ago I visited the State Prison facility at Buena Vista. We were interested in the possibility of employing some of the inmates as they were released from the boot camp facility and have since been successful in doing just that. In talking to some of the people in the community I found a very positive attitude towards the facility. I was impressed with the discipline and attitude of the inmates in the boot camp facility which places great emphasis on discipline and education in preparing the inmates to function better in our society once ri-laAccad. I believe the Del Camino facility will provide some of the same services which have proven to decrease the number of offenders returning to prison. In considering this project I believe that facts should be the determining basis for the approval or disapproval of this facility. Some of those facts are: . This facility will have the same level of security as a County Jail facility. . The pre-release inmates have no incentive to escape as they are completing the last 90 days of their sentence. . When the inmates are released, they are released only to their respective communities. Only Weld County former residents will be released in Weld County. . The unique program emphasis on educational training can only better the chances that these inmates can become productive citizens upon return to society. . Weld County planning staff has recommended approval of this project. . This project will provide 110 staff jobs and $3.5 million in payroll. . The location of the proposed facility lends itself well for easy access to I-25 for transportation of inmates in and out of the facility. Finally, I would hope that on December 8th as the representatives for all of the people in Weld County you will consider the facts and the true benefits for this facility in making your final decision. Sincerely, Delbert L. Fast C.E.O. , Century Housing Corporation 931249 `"°°"r"'" MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT R A p Administrative Office: 700 Weaver Park Road • Longmont, CO 80501 ',{1111 (303) 772-0710 Metro (303) 666-4404 I■L E vim • December 3, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners; On December 2 , 1993 the Mountain View Fire Protection District held a special meeting at which the proposed pre- parole prison facility was discussed. The Board of Directors reviewed information regarding estimated emergency responses to the proposed facility, and discussed code requirements that will be enforced at the facility. The Mountain View Fire Protection District finds that the design concept of the proposed pre-parole prison facility complies with existing fire codes and the District will be able to meet the fire protection services required by such facility with its existing resources. The -Mountain View Fire Protection District shares the community's concern about adequate law enforcement protection so as to insure safe passage for our firefighters in the event of emergency calls at this facility. Respectfully, Thomas Boughey, Director dlm A Station I Station 2 Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Station 6 93109 9119 Cnty Line Rd. 10971 WCR 13 P.O.Box 575 P.O.Box 11 10911 Dobbin Run P.O.Box 666 P.O.Box 40 Longmont,CO Longmont,CO 299 Palmer Ave. 8500 Niwot Road Lafayette,CO 600 Briggs 100 So.Forest St. 80501 80504 Mead.CO 80542 Niwot,CO 80544 80026 Erie,CO 80516 Dacono,CO 80514 hibzf DDDD.D Pt; �o�� THE 1750 6th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado 80631, (303) 39263 353' l l l ) John T .. Copp:Copporn, PhD. Administrator December 3, 1993 Weld County Board of Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners : This is in response to concerns voiced by opponents of the Preparole Release Center regarding law enforcement response to the facility. First, we will have our own trained security staff, which will handle most on-site incidents . The Department of Corrections will have a liaison agent, who is a certified Colorado peace officer, assigned to the facility. All available information shows that such facilities do not demand a large number of requests for law enforcement assistance. Sheriff Jordan recognizes this fact in his referral response to this matter, by indicating that he has no concerns regarding his agency ' s ability to respond. In regard to emergency responses to this facility in the unlikely event of an internal disturbance, off-grounds evacuation, etc . , the commissioners should be aware that mutual aid agreements and services contracts will be developed between our agency, the Weld County Sheriff ' s office, and other law enforcement agencies in the area. To this end, I have spoken with the following agencies, who have agreed, upon the request of our agency and Sheriff Jordan, to provide mutual aid assistance: The Longmont Police Department The Greeley Police Department The Loveland Police Department I am not unfamiliar with the need to develop comprehensive emergency plans for correctional facilities . I have no concerns regarding our ability to have adequate law enforcement response for any situation that may arise at the preparole release facility. Thank you. Sincerely, Michael Brand Corrections Director / Self-Care" Residential Living with Full Nutritional and Recreational Programs Ex/2 ‘/J rV CEE « : Pc; 66c231249 MEMORANDUM TO: William N. Bailey, Deputy Chief, Support Services FROM: Mark A. Lawley, Assistant Chief, Fire Prevention SUBJECT: Summary and Staff Recommendation on the proposed Del Camino Pre-release Center DATE: December 2, 1993 The Villa at Greeley, Inc. is proposing the construction of a building of about 123,000 square feet, to be located on the I-25 Frontage Road about '/2 mile north of WCR 24. It is the intent of the Villas to operate a private, highly structured secure pre-release facility, housing up to 300 offenders that have an average of 90 days left to serve on their sentence.' Applicable codes The Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Building Code, Life Safety Code and the Fire Protection Development Standards apply to this facility. The Uniform Building Code classifies the Center as a Group I, Division 3 occupancy. Group I, Division 3 Occupancies are defined as "Mental hospitals, mental sanitariums, jails, prisons, reformatories and buildings where personal liberties of inmates are similarly restrained."2 The office and administrative area will be classified as a Group, Division 2 Occupancy. All of the applicable codes apply restrictive requirements to Group I Occupancies since the underlying basis for classification in this Group is an inability to respond normally to fire or other life-threatening events either through mental or physical limitations. The general fire protection philosophy for this Group is to "protect in place" rather than "removing the exposed". Therefore, the Uniform Building Code requires that a building of this size be Type I, Fire-Resistant, or Type II, Fire-Resistant. These are the two most restrictive types of construction, in which all materials used in the construction of the building must be non-combustible and all structural elements of the building protected from the effects of heat to a very high degree.3 'Final Plan prepared for the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board of Commissioners. 2Uniform Building Code Section 1001. 3Uniform form Building Code Section 1002(b). Summary and Staff Recommendation Del Camino Pre-release Center lof5 .x'? 1',I FACE/C. £c. : Az_ !ac In addition to the requirement for fire-resistive construction, the building is required by the Uniform Building Code to have a fire sprinkler system throughout the building and a fire alarm system throughout the building. The sprinkler piping may be dry with the system controlled by a manual valve.4 I believe that current technology will allow the use of a wet or preaction system in this area, even though the Building Code permits a manual system. To determine the requirements under the Life Safety Code, it is necessary to define the manner in which inmates are controlled under fire emergency conditions. In this facility, inmates will be moved outside the building into the securely fenced yard in a fire or other emergency situation. The Life Safety Code requires that the yard must be large enough that the inmates can be moved at least 50 feet from the buildings The Life Safety Code will require a detection system in parts of the building, special separations of hazardous areas from inmate areas, division of sleeping spaces into separate smoke compartments and an engineered smoke control system where windows are not openable. The Fire Protection Development Standards outline requirements for hydrants and access. In addition to meeting all of the Code requirements, the architect has agreed to install standpipes throughout the building since the windows will not be openable and the door interlocks in the sally ports will make the advancing of hose lines into the building almost impossible. The architect also has indicated agreement with all other items that the Fire District has requested of him. Fire District actions on the project On April 22, 1993, Chuck Boyes and I went to Greeley to meet with Loren Bley of Bley and Associates, architect for the project. Mr. Bley briefly outlined the scope and conceptual design of the project. We, in turn, outlined the codes and standards used by the Fire District. Since that time Mr. Bley and Chuck Boyes have met several times to review the site plan, and have had numerous telephone conversations to discuss the project. The Fire District has indicated to the Weld County Department of Planning Services that there is no objection to this facility as long as the facility can meet the requirements of the District's Codes and Standards. On August 9, 4Uniform Building Code Section 3802(g) 5Life Safety Code Section 14-1.4 Summary and Staff Recommendation Del Camino Pre-release Center 2of5 3.312 1993, the Fire District approved the access, utility, and site plan subject to certain conditions contained in a letter, dated the same date (attached). No building plans have been submitted or approved. Projected Impacts on the Fire District: To evaluate the potential impacts to the Fire District, it was necessary to determine what facilities could be considered to be equivalent to this pre- release facility, since Colorado has none currently. Rod Bottoms, with the National Institute for Corrections stated that many states have had pre- release centers for a number of years. He also stated that county jails are really pre-release type facilities since the average stay for an inmate in a county jail is 48 days. This provides a good comparison with the average 90 day stay in the pre-release center. The architect has provided the Fire District with emergency fire and medical service response information for the Weld County jail in Greeley, the Boulder County jail in Boulder, and the Larimer Count jail in Fort Collins. In all cases, the information came from the responding Fire Department. Weld County Jail, Greeley For the calendar year of 1992, the Greeley Fire Department responded to 21 requests for emergency service. Of those 21 requests, 19 were for emergency medical service and 2 were for fire service. One fire service call was for a fire in the emergency generator room which resulted in no damage; the other was for a propane leak from a pick-up truck. A copy of the response breakdown for the Weld County jail is attached. Boulder County Jail, Boulder From January 1, 1993 to November 29, 1993 the Boulder Fire Department responded to 18 requests for emergency service. Of those 18 requests, 13 were for emergency medical service and six were for fire emergencies. Most of those fire emergencies were accidental alarms with one being for a discharge of the hood extinguishing system in the kitchen. The Fire Department was unable to establish a specific cause for the discharge of the extinguishing system. Although food was being prepared by cooks, the cooks denied that there had been a flare-up or a grease fire. There was no evidence of a fire. If the Boulder County jail numbers for the first eleven months are extrapolated to a full year, then the total responses will be about 20 with 13 of those being medical and 7 being fire responses. Larimer County Jail, Fort Collins In 1992, the Poudre Fire Authority responded to 24 calls to the Larimer County jail. Of these 22 were emergency medical calls and 2 Summary and Staff Recommendation Del Camino Pre-release Center 3 of 5 9012•' 9 were emergency fire calls. Of the two fire calls, one was a gas odor, the other was a system malfunction in the automatic fire alarm system. Summary of responses Facility Population Medical Calls Fire Calls Total Calls Weld County 240 19 2 21 Larimer County 275 22 2 24 Boulder County 350 13 7 20 From the information on the jails provided above, it is clear that there will an increase in the number of responses to the facility. Because of the A extensive code requirements applied to this facility under the "protect in place" fire protection concept, the probability of serious fires requiring extensive use of Fire District resources is very close to zero. The center will train all of their employees to meet State and Federal standards in fire protection, however, the center does not train their employees to meet the standards for an OSHA recognized fire brigade. This means that the center will essentially be dependent on the Fire District to provide any fire protection needed that is beyond the level of the built-in fire protection. The center will have a nursing staff on duty 16 hours per day. During the other 8 hours, there will be an emergency medical technician on duty. All staff members are required to complete basic first aid and CPR training. The center is not a governmental organization and will pay property taxes to the Fire District. The cost for the land and the building of the facility will be $8.5 million to $9 million dollars. The facility will pay the usual plans review and inspection fees during construction. Based on an average of 21.6 calls per year to the facility, estimating that it will take 30 minutes on each call, with a response of one engine and one squad on each call, using a charge of $150 per hour per engine and $75 per hour per squad, there will be a total cost to the District of$2450 per year for responses to the Center. It is estimated that the tax revenue to the Fire District from the center will be about $13,000 per year at the 19940 mil levy. Staff recommendation The staff's opinion is that the use of the District's resources by the Center will be compensated by the tax revenue to be received from the center. The protection needs of the Center can be met with the stations, firefighters and Summary and Staff Recommendation Del Camino Pre-release Center 4of5 9Z1`249 equipment that the Fire District currently has without requiring any additions. f Summary and Staff Recommendation Del Camino Pre-release Center 5 of 5 sal a (] sou"r"r MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Administrative Office: j s 700 Weaver Park Road• Longmont, CO 80501 R (303) 772-0710 Metro (303) 666-4404 view 41 x .• . April 26, 1993 Mr. Loren Bley Bley Associates, Architects 2020 Clubhouse Drive Greeley, CO 80634 Dear Mr. Bley: ;;, Assistant Chief Mark Lawley and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the proposed correction facility in the Del Camino area. From our discussion, I see no problems with the facility complying with the adopted codes and standards of the Fire District. I have included with this letter a copy of the Fire District Development Standards, a list of fire suppression system contractors that are registered with the Colorado Division of Fire Safety, and the resolution of the Board of Directors establishing the fee schedule for the Fire District. Assistant Chief Lawley and I look forward to working with you on this project. _ Sincerely, Charles E. Boyes Fire Prevention Specialist CC: Jerry Ward,Chief of the District William N.Bailey,Deputy Chief, Support Services Mark A. Lawley, Assistant Chief, Fire Prevention Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Station 6 Station 7 9119Cnty Line Rd. 10971 WCR 13 P.O.Box575 P.O.Box 11 10911 Dobbin Run P.O.Box666 P.O.Box40 Longmont,CO Longmont,CO 299 Palmer Ave. 8503 Neat Road Lafayette,CO -E00 Briggs 100 So.Forest SL 80501 80504 Mead,CO 80542 Neat.0080544 80026 Ede,0080516 Dacono.CO 80514 9012,19 ,. = �'F `j°""T"''' - ,.MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE}PROTECTION DISTRICT '- p Administrative Office: i s 700 Weaver Park Road• Longmont, CO 80501 E. (303) 772-0710 Metro (303) 666-4404 September 13, 1993 Mr. Keith A. Schuett, Current Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Case Number S-344 Del Camino PreRelease Center Dear Mr. Schuett: I have reviewed this proposal and have had several meetings with Loren Bley, the architect for the facility. The Fire District has approved the plot plan, and the utility and drainage plan. The District's comments are contained in the letter of August 9, 1993, which is included in the Final Plan document. The Fire District has no objections to the facility as long as the facility meets the requirements of the adopted codes and standards of the District. The Fire District is particularly concerned with having good access to the site, since this facility will be a target hazard for the District. Two separate access routes are needed into the site, including access to the East Frontage Road from both Highway 66 and Highway 119. The plan the District has approved will meet those access requirements. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Charles E. Boyes Fire Prevention Specialist CC: Jerry Ward, Chief of the District William N. Bailey, Deputy Chief, Support Services Mark A. Lawley, Assistant Chief, Fire Prevention Station I Station 2 Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Station 6 Station 7 9119 Cn1y Doe Rd. 10971 WCR 13 P.O.Box 575 P.O.Box 11 10911 Dobbin Run P.O.Box 666 P.O.Box 40 ' Longmont,CO Longmont,CO 299 Palmer Ave. 6500 Newt Road Lafayette,CO 600 Briggs 100 So.Forest SL 80501 80504 Mead.CO 80542 Nowt,CO 80544 80026 Erie,CO 80516 Dacono.CO 80514 9x1249 2605 14th Ave . Cti.'-` Greeley, CO 80631 December 2, 1993 Mr. Michael Brand 555 18th St . Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Mr. Brand: I am writing to commend you on the operation of the Restitution Center here in Greeley. Certainly the facility is run with a firm rein and the residents are required to be responsible . I am thankful there is this alternative to prison for some who have offended the law. Personally I would be in favor of having another such facility in the county . As the jail chaplain my goal is to see inmates face the confusion of their lives and chose to change direction. I believe facilities such as the Restitution Center are an aid in this direction. Thank you for the work you are doing. Sincerely, Donald Norbie , Jail haplain. 9012449 txh!1; UE-6-O-6L /'G' .G3oCG Addiction Recovery Center Education and Treatment for Substance Abuse and Dependency 800 8th Avenue • Suite 200 • Greeley, Colorado 80631 • (303)352-6$37 c November 29 , 1993 The Weld County Commissioners 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Commissioners : I am writing this letter in support of the Villa ' s efforts to build a pre-parole facility in Weld County. As the director of the Addiction Recovery Center I have worked with the Restitution Center and the Residential Treatment Center for the past four years and am very familiar with their programs . My understanding of the proposed facility is that it will be a rehabilitative effort on the part of the Villa to work with inmates prior to parole focusing on cognitive skills , general education, substance abuse education and vocational training. As you know these are all areas of training from which most inmates would benefit . It is also my understanding that this will be a facility for the lowest risk inmates, and that they would parole to their own jurisdictions after meeting the parole board. A part of the programming will apparently be for case managers to coordinate services with the area where the client will parole to assure on-going services are provided in their community. I feel this will be a vital part of the programming as inmates transition to the community. The Addiction Recovery Center wholeheartedly supports the efforts of the Villa in opening this pre-parole facility to assist inmates in their transition into the community, and we sincerely hope you will consider their request . Sincerely, � rlCou I11K ; Mimi Bernhardt, Program Director ) ; 1)66(3'1249 9 COUNTY SHERIFFS OF COLORADO �tV sHFy� 11160 North Huron, Suite 31, Northglenn, CO 80234 la ernes Telephone: (303) 457-3575 O. * FAX: (303) 457-3713 2,;43 ,e EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: tag,qC0Ln ,, John L Kammerzell December 3, 1993 Weld County Board of Commissioners P.O. Box 758 °RESIDENT Greeley, CO 80631 -'' ]tr wood ontezuma County Dear Commissioners: .•' VICE PRES. On behalf of the County Sheriffs of Colorado, I wish to express the sheriffs' strong support for .,.m Drury siting the pre-parole facility in the Del Camino area of your county. As you know from his Alamosa County testimony before the Greeley City Council, the construction of this facility in Weld County also has the support of Sheriff Ed Jordan as well as his fellow sheriffs throughout the state. znd VICE PRES. Ron Beckham The sheriffs have been supporting this facility since it was first proposed by the Colorado lre�nn county PPo g P P Criminal Justice Commission. We have had the opportunity to examine the construction and operating plans for the facility together with the background and reputation of the company that SEC.TREA will operate it. Therefore, we can state that the proposed facility is designed to provide more �vee Zulauf Pe P P g lama County than adequate security, that the operational plans are sound, and that the company that will operate it has the expertise to manage the type of offenders that will be housed there. ,IJIED.PAST PRES. ary Cure However, the support of the County Sheriffs of Colorado does not stem from our conviction Jackson County that this facility will present no danger to the citizens of Weld County, but from our knowledge of the need for pre-parole services. The inadequate capacity of our community-based _IRECTORS: correctional system results in too many offenders being released from prison without proper preparation for re-entry into society. Left without meaningful assistance in finding housing and employment or resisting the availability of drugs and alcohol, all too many of these offenders an cO"e"`in° return to criminal activity as a means of basic survival as well as means of purchasing drugs Pueblo County g and/or alcohol. dm Eberly The program for which the proposed pre-parole facility has been designed will provide intensive Otero County preparation for the release of an offender into the community that is his or her parole destination. The sheriffs believe this program will help reduce recidivism and enhance the Ward Goff public safety throughout the state. That is the reason why we have strongly supported the Baca County construction of the pre-parole facility for the past five years. It is also the reason why we urge you to approve the siting of this facility in the rural area adjacent to the Del Camino Richard Shockley interchange. Latimer County Sincerely Steve&dos �, � �-�" R.�y"✓ nouglas County Marg et E. Ackerman, Ph. D. Legislative Liaison 901249 gicliih t it/ll /‘, �6c�. 227 N. 83rd Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 The Weld County Board of Commissioners P. O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners: This letter is being written to urge you to approve the development of the Del Camino Pre-Release Facility. There are many reasons this development should be approved. Just a few are: The 100 plus jobs with a payroll of over $3 million would be a definite asset to Weld County. It is a proven fact facilities such as this do operate success- fully in "light" industrial parks, such as the ones in Boulder and Fort Collins. It has been pointed out that property values have not decreased in these areas which are adjacent to the facilities. There is so much emphasis being put on acquiring "clean" industry in our area with regard to the environment. This facility would cer- tainly fall within those guidelines. We are all aware of over-crowding in our prisons. There is no doubt this would be a first step in helping to alleviate this problem and at no cost to the taxpayer. And lastly, unfortunately, I am well aware, because of first hand experience, that Mr. Coppom operates his facilities in a first class manner. What he says he will do, he does. His facilities are main- tained properly; they are clean; residents are as happy there as they could be, under the circumstances; his employees are well-trained, caring and efficient. Please act affirmatively on this proposed Pre-Release Facility. Your "yes" decision will be of great benefit to Weld County. Sincerely, 7 Dorothy,Corkran cxhibit cc : / • 451.f1249 e NOTES ,2/,/93 66 - 2T2.7i d Ot rn, t vA ) ,b2, n Use c) `---)W . 1) t--T., hobo)ctizo cAkidetd 5LA et Is: KkkKk Kk de "(_. ,on- LOL _ VSC C u C •y V-W VV>. YUYu " •' • 0S •l.- 0w r - u _ '_ - Oa C.. a..., 0W__ vICe - - O T - C r•.6 - c .-.C Jq - - - O a - J >N 0 u C C r a -_O < -Iy e p rwu - Vq O V.+< C 0 0 ,Ca 0 c— _— — _ V ¢ AN " wvp p u cc urn` - — - 0h0 0.-C cq o.` ."•< ctr "o u 0_ eT 0 _≥ Y J _ V O 00 <�>�LV •:0 e 0 L Y .r C �r C <r CO -- L ...j N •Vq J.C 0 .. 0 LN— Y qV CC "— W I C Cdr_ NC — O — .C .0�. O E_ O 4Vt--_ V N C r` U 0 V>• U _ " O 0 -C V E C N 0 U O T C " L C C u — C V.C— — w w w cV o— 0 L a 0 �l C V.acre0 a v< — T.C.,. ,.>6E 0C41 C Y u C - C. —.O. — J O Y V W —lc O V (SVYLC O 0 —G — 0L g6t--. Yn 0Y PrOT Y V — - 0q " o V veal .. f.- — L • L u— L a V — to u WC-- NPY — art- V y— CTC.... N` a 0 — t — ,—'F. " n_ T_— VOC— m0 — Lj .0 O Y V L L 0 �CO O^• N S— d N c CI 0 Y— Orr uNi J 0 ••••O" — 4. 0 —_ i C— 0. O L C V e C ^ Y V C 0 — e L_9 Y 0•/ c C N— ra m- Oa V 0 0 L C r P O Y r n • o. E O V`3.U N L a V U L V _I a O u . U C e w... WC — E r u v".J C u O_ e. n ."ViC - e = N V eeFF4� 0.0 al S � _ -_o car =—LPi2 - Y L? N O `� a CI- .— (V(�� N= OL G 0 0 v e .0 >a W OCS n — -` Cif \ Co6. "—es L C n ; .. Li ^ •v — d Ie L `a..N — 'C AIL woe .L. M V O C .^ 0 • a 7 16.0• V•.' Y 8 0 'CO y C q • " N p ). N u C 0 Y V Y -I 2.... q 6. QL m v E 0a E; E o. 41 �I"0 COCV Cu- P " c r - >.j0 - 2- cam-II! 0 p • V v qoE O CC - - 7LL.. -.q O >.^••+ E g q_ C - o r.-a ,C. 'J 'u N- r_ "E 2 2,c'Y c O L v S r OI-_ .. L N 0 V W - V a I. P -V a. _ V O a - F q t yd. o y- e N G eC u -{J LPn a EV EL E •cot, 3 " N� _ Oq O.+ - ` V c r w_ !L..' >. ?-1 V -P_0. -N-u a < d _%-. 04. 1- 01.1.- L S d V V V = q V — N- T" u dCON - S OU O— OV 0 O •-.G L- .•U- NP 00 O up d V• VC L ^ V -0 ^ C E O v — 0 — 0 .O L—.. = L V O • _ • • — •...Q o..Lr L q.0 Y — o u 0 —a• 0 I - .0 O ..0 V y^ .0c0- 6• r — V>W 6.N Y -' N YrCV Cc �O �Vq .+� E co— Y au •• ..7 h V L a 9 u N N a at b y..- 0 V L - q v L N J.+ I ` L V V 5 _ C V - P C• OE V�i l•"J u V C 0 ^ , B 4. E 0.0 u o V 9 V c- C 0 W O— O V._+ _ o . H L., N•-- O L Y Y< L O O 6 P W 0 q V O N 0 L O V V J =N.. - 6< - V V V V --J • • //�\\ J .O O 'lea- 6- 0. .p• u C .14) 4) 0— i= ; q 0 ^ 1 0.LO 'JL a I pW n-- LO S 00= O _ " > u 960 0 9 qI Od w < ""J w O YI 0I d' 6y V O • _ �� w• O W—O NI ` _ dIC 3N V_ — V y— J --C.C 0 .� V L 9 J O a \t in e. d— r ,J CI I V• C- -�. ¢oc I in dE of OIVCl — E el:4 / q O d O.+ _2 G W a LI '10 6 W •— ( •'� 0 J V_ V O. OI Li g a 9 q q S � a uLc - Pe 3L L 6II vlc".• E _ > o E e) ....`3 •�� go—QW = z_ a 4am y Liao .d N • 6I O` L_ vV a N _ tI7.—G w v as e V"J y V >. O— T r q � •-L a L NANO al . o T` L w� rIl I - q q w q OI O W C v V0O 00— I�<W— LI ,JO L C CI.q.Iv OT _ 7 '— 0—N. � q19�N ' N —y P_I r _ spa g w C G " q » q� \1 6'O VB Oq OSW_d_ O L9 YI VIC ILI�� v cc O. a-L/ N M V I —L N— ` 0o a • Nlw n� wG O —_3 a.C e —N 6 •GayI OIL::L 0 L L C `V OI G Y q C Cw S N` L ;la: N—< U J Y Tql N. CP Sr< 6I— q co GVIto uOa u C N Z—W—_ ccN Y ui(\-,..1 go ggg 1 - V V LI V 6 O 0..1.67 q00 V 1 931249 • . • y L 0 0 u_ •L l C- OI C V C 0 O C-"-` V C L L-. - C C a q_y n E' O L O N— _ a > ✓ - - — C C. — r�Jr 9r P -. L 0 N a — O T 0 J ... VC✓ TY V r NV 0 V pOV^ • .-V—p— J9G 2 a...=p •C ` -L C C 9u •_. v0 v r J c 6- p E C C . C.- O V N O CC c-00 N -r y—C co P. E C C .c...-.—O V O-- > q — L O L Va t,...-.-. V CO •3j r C S S✓ L O u Y x C C J O C a.a ../ .• 0,- 4.36. >,a -w 0 r 0C C a 6r V .. • > t O.n n CO C Y V L., u e p✓ V C O 0 — v• V 6 on 9 _IL C C •• a ✓= p C COC V C V✓V 6 q V Or C O V .IV V N— Y-- u In r r YV NO MO GC — L-- NN • ,..0410 x N = 000 0CJO C C ,...... 0 .4 Y 9- u✓ O 41 C C CI N t/9 V— p y Y O y� CE v'- „ JrgNq vS ., C TPp v pEvJOvL.: p—.Vi _w_ ✓I . •.t E v Mw _CN LC N LCi 000 y i O J aI•C Y u L 2 ECE[ t.,-,--.. _ OI C CIx C O. r.1 i C 09— — a� V O . . ... ,,, = ,, ,.. c- ,„ g C E N >< C C V C„-+ C a Y< al C CIO L V C CM l Vat rai a. C.0 Cw Cl — ` CC C — U. yr.r L PY✓ GC CC91CVNNV N LVV_ O Mr LVCV C V CI0 V0L • — > V 0_ 1 - OY YOLEC OL VnVr N .0 e v C + 1y1-� -'ro Y a O C N 9 ✓I -C C0 - O E:r.-.4 c 0 O=TC C 0 CC • Yu L OC1• > C— _L= u O. q Clv L C x L N O L O v ..-.016 V r T V V—e Y V_ ≥ O V I C O O V 0 N- L. 4. 6 j O - = 0 )I.v C r-u V L O<v- 75 N V 6. t/9 G O O. YI r r-L GYP O O `I O V ✓ p o 4) oleo C V 9 L 16 C -` 3 0 0 VNN IC > q LCr0 C LIOOu C..IN L 9 y •V a u c p1.u L- J q q O J O-- - Val O 1 O V V --q .... sou V O C 6u. - >139 O- a✓ -'-C mar .C V „ rgCC 'r CO -- Or 1 y . 4I.- VW 10- V y y • O- 0 V v . V O N I C O Y N u J 4. C.0 -r. 0 C L -I CII J 6 •- V•On- • O alp p 9 C.O•CV O. 0 T LL-• 0 x PQ 0 N_ U V u 'J ✓I O V- • -I y 9..0...- 0000 a02,-.uC C yea t O p c x` N C a.I Tr- T O NV C 0 c . a r a f a tOM- C 3.0 3 - 9 I L C -- - O ON O CICmmiIL C C N T V CI T C- r c aim= L T. a C At 0 'lc --- J y OILY-u O 0 C V Ea • C- Y L tJ Ca OI C V E —r. _ o J ✓ C V E- I r CCq C O.- L Nr LC • L- IC- OO0 - < cal N N 6 -V N CI N C N U N - J r C 0 V V O N -O-C V 0 C- a Oo✓ - Y • - oN - 0 V-10.••• •• 00 -60v3Cvv o 3 r o 0<L- ==1 fC > N — N .C — C ov— 'I: C w a O o .... .. . .. ., . .O t/9 C On O , C •I C C r C O p N— Y— O U — • u_ C 6' t O r r • W q 9 _at ,. C C C r — N r r r ca =-. 6-- 00 .0 N ▪ Y C W O C- r L1 O•.- V U . O V u r 1-30 u . C r'r✓C C VC I O EE >C re....-.Ca 00-9 aN _V— VOC w> N CC > E— .“.... a C -- ^• O N—I` y........ a V ^I CI ✓ a u V •J'I C >I N • v C_ x O- L L a C L L L N _< r N -I4- C L N GC N PN� L', 1 6 —_ V_=—. m O CO SSSY 6C -'-C— V V < — V u10 O C O O V r q `v Y— J -- . O u 6 ....0-4..o 0 1 `- J IV aI V— V w V J J V C L 0 L.o c. 17 a C —✓r a= 0 n C. Ill-- g r II C O 'I O O L C 0-O+ L✓ L C V P OL T O O O L Y 0 c — V V L- C_ cm- Va O— Lt/ r rP rP r _ r— it .r -' •.y... ..3 . r N ; —. Q uI 6 0 V v v as p C— a— O T L x -0 r—r cc ' C aY -.. ' .` : o o o. 9 0 > 6 C C o o L c O q .Y O C— 3.d. t/9 _ > _ _ _ V N O L O O T^ 6 y r.- 0 a V- 0 T Cu r.IL C N a •U V- Y O V L 6 a Q C - V L >v- O r V V Y T •L y 6 •II..-r V P� C TT VIVO C 6- U • t/ 9 0 T T T ` p L x ✓IL v .o c I` j - T C V ° 00 q L V--+v o U O 9 E c•- .40 -O y 9 L C p > a o C V-C r V q 91 V V C- • •• 6 t. j u V u SL E- V- 0 O E r tv C C- •` E L J O r Nn� n--•> E o - CjyVac- Tr C- O V ccOCar J r Y C ...al , p L x p 0 V v el I. E- >- Y Y @ c w FF C L V KM L r C CI u•• u- � T Y a t/...0 —Ja 6 v 6 - 0 9 1- E a � v > 03r0-.a. o c a. p- , 0r0 r 0006...- ..- -u •C.. n a 0 O CC- -3—. .e r o 6 c a o r c Ya -. 0r0 ✓IV N- - a9V1Vq OC r - ...- .6g, - TE C.-9p- uu rL _ _ 9 V art VC L a 3 ;to ,. a L V C 9 r V V J u V O O 6 t/ O - V O C O O L = t/ .....•— P Men.a 9` 6•Oi T—v c.o. Pr— > O 0 O a •COI v ✓ O V •LW Mr— - . O O C C C T we) u`— C C C C— O 9✓ 9 O PL — •— .9 O L V ` V q l L .O.•C C✓ 9 t/ 05Y,U . —= CO_ — MV MEWL C 1 6 O N a 1 41 pt/ > S r L xIL•l a✓ C — 3...., P VCV a 0 V O • C O ...C.v.. Y O lC PC PC C— JT-- PC PV` ur:L_✓ N _• T` Vly •• LCrVCC MV 6I` LIr-- NLLCV Lv LO— u OL 1 — E L C C a •Va y LI O— ` V LCT C _ CL Maur - LO C - — ' C••c . V..“ ev • O• VV Nya C;C_V C 6.T- a Vx C n O Tu CNr C.C V0 en — u LI C 044017.-- q ___ 4...-. 0 V V.- c a a w V r E u q 0 p O - O a t/— C .-w V— O _ V— v a C a O — 0.• O C L k P u.0 VL z_. P • _ V C V L C s a L L O Y > 3 M c O 44.....L... . MC C O ` U C— O r r O L C V O r L 00... ca q 5,c— o 1 t/ r r .2— Va N V + C— C CC 6— L6VC ] y'— — V•• JOYN L — V— Y V C OIL O O 3 t/"1 — V V_— 0 CY > Irr -4 C a— C CO— •aa C ar u V asr 1ya .• V c..—to C V Ca < a — <r ac Cp a_ C q-I < T. a M.- ON✓— 8 O a t/ d— }C} •V Al EC !C— gC L NO V 6 C p L C u V P. r 8 ✓ e`r ! .-q. _ YIi v; ....ace .= EpVV VEV .VEOC.T-.00.. ECYJ --`-I4Y . C30 Va n P x L��L10 L r-- L L L v r .. ... v W 0 L =` a a t a V` C C.Ca Ma >.p•V 01 N > V ≥ O > 6 V- V I 9•a V . 6 q.• V VI U- V 161•16` C9-001a 610- P-- 6 Pa Pte• PVn OVxin2 P- .va9 .✓v 21r a. 9fli 3,219 • • Mt Y C • Y y L J P C TC T'no 0,41 J—•-• C L O^^ Y C Y tut V C— a ID_ C .....-C V— O c O — ^r— a—r— L OIV C J L.�.C G u N u 1 6 ✓ 9 V r 0 01 .4-"0 `Q 'CI ,-r rJ L •,6i•.. r 6 'EL V C T VI6•0 WI ,- I -- y9 4203 vVE-= . G. 6C -▪ VL wt u- LI C V M C ..•m:'C. w C u O O J V V yF-• O C O Y- 20•O V 6� J V P� L L C ma 6u C q q 6 O L OC O V O rV u_—.j u 60. w p — [[.. S LC Cur l.u— Y. L u 0 w- a G O I C L E- V V C L's Y C u 0.V al V- YC a O I •YaM - Cu ri ONOC.06 OYl04.44�, L a a u» C 4.261. ••••-7.4C . 601 y Vlw r- w C • 4 J e L w C_ V ID- `'y r o l Vu C r wL_ L a-E PV 6 la 9 a Y✓ 9j C E __ OIOV > P V > V- L J1yl01Y 6. �G'v .aim PJr 1.- ` Y V C L- 9 9 T 0 0 am- 6 1ryr•6- VL. '.C C - O G C ,:?-,, a ., ! 6 0 C N L `• = f= O w 0 6 w w 44. IY.I.l J'.L-O C L-. • OwYe 0Y 9CL — LV .✓- YV u Y0. lC.L �• o S—_C V 1y — _ r C 9 V in u Irv. O V O' V ..w 6 a y 41 C W Y Y v v w —O✓ . { N.C. V•a 9 L in I C 6 U -40 [ C! Y9 IOIV:6 Jr.. 0 a.• V O L r-C a L V Ir, 6 C O V N 9 II L- • q C . J_ O-Lv TLV • CGICX 9I NIY YLO7 G9 -Or V al C NOa LILIL4 .LE ae OI V•PY qN VuuL9U- Cr Juaa WIC 0.6 4.COCK CI 40 NV VCIj'CI•V >6•D- _ w j q 003 ,00V41 C uF.-O P C6 .Or 4 la v n al C` .= C `u u 6 0 as .4 - 46060 0 ID C J it J 1_ -. G V C V X > 0.V r 40 R 01> 1 r>>l a u✓C Y c. 6 w CC.11 L P C O✓ 9 N 6,.. .• Y OI V 9 w 0 9 L P U es cm✓ O Y 66t4 El at V O` I..r.0 l w'q_ Li 4, OCl- C w9 w N _ > V IL •.V. V N i IrV > C•. O. 00 .0 010C IY�6VL-lV L . G y^ 669- T 'CO. , . .V IC 60 -0c Y YI V•N OL.b.9 C O O I 9 N :c .c ID.V C 0. 0 0 L- V w V N C- ell.-9 I.01 I C.u O C _ L> V0 C6-r VIC Or-C Y C +O. 6L 7:6 a O VOL ` YCO .CI LII • - C uOw N ly LCY 010 C6 • O ▪ 4 u p-r C Y . O J G Y N V J CJ O L J •'a J C Y .✓ I Y.aJ a V V Y�•• .3 O'N T P _ L w 6 _ .:I uiU V- eu V Yu L Iu1C'V Cu. C 61rv:G �j OIq p- 0O- P•Li .0 rU V _ u — 6✓a. 9 L — az q6V JI • d_ o—_.r 9CJ,.. c VC 'gO -6- c •06 w6OCvWiV u - —r _ O r. 3 P= 641•Y C. L C Y 4.° ✓i s o c O r ea r.r a u ID V v r .• Y, o_ w u.G. Cuei. 19 C •YL rup0 CN .^ IL.' .O N��l O) P C .. V t 6 7. E0 -44 L P 9 • N VC C C L — C J C C'-• win L V C"r V 1� qr u E O L.O� qco- 02E N u . V ry lV - L y ID a E u a V. Eew 9-m• '- - lJ .. �— _ >rL L —•L q ,� a w 9 V V . V Y Y V C >.C O _at u CI Y V ea O C D 0 CI O .0i V 4 6 — Ca, P O L N O`a 0 U 0 , 666 u u3 v o-a°!� .ccaC Lilac LP9 6 _ p L O Y 9 V G9 9 Cr. a w L C y c C. Lilac Y6PC rL7- 60— "]V . _ O. W SI r 5 ✓ Cb YC 'Cu.' w YC Cc) Yul — C 6 C Y•"•V '.N VPC PL7 al a. C—G — V O = N ..r N .C G— 0 9 0 0 0 V L V C— C V C V V E J — —vu L— W C— C C • 0• Cu— - • — Y T J C a w T✓ 0.10111.10.140.= V.0 w e C r N _ VTLa. - CL0 GC .E.° Cp L0. •Jw r— TCN w 0 Y G G. 0 0 C T 0 : W. 9 V V C `.01- .0 u N C C0 0 I- 00 L-- G. , a_ , VV —. J V 600. C C C C— , a - . C • p enc.- a. ^C 4.l C C.V+ a a 9 ...r L. •0+ ,— E u:V 0 C e> T O a L Y ESC 9 0. _ Y 6 `u C b r O O • w m 3 r J 6, q C E E V a J O a V.0 O. E.E.X w V 0— q C i Oilsc 40 " e' — = V 0, °C6C Le 44-_ V' a'S . Cn '.LCr1 • p Y I a T , _ - 9 • C C 9 O a 6 Y V o I .ti ✓ — c n S a 3 - •VEI .7 . : O w .j- d >O 0 >I. C C a , t . a ^ C l0 r_ . .Vi .O.CW'•G•r` GVl OVn u a r Y—. T . . • P O P—_ aPVO . r 0 w C V Cme 7 , 63al ^_ 0 0Or 6O 9P> 6 a 9 ✓ 41 6+ Y C . 400 . . . 4.0c ... _ 6 V 6r L O C — C 9.0 a — C 0 N I., t u e— Co. L Ilia L [ � - ur ,' Mali r Y Y 0_ Y 6Cu N — 0u' Cu NJC C . l t O N . C . u a O L. V q 6.4 .. 7.6 lr 63C4.4007 Y Y V 9 . C Pa V C 0- 0. P> Cc L . . . . .--- O P L- 31CI — . Ctw 0 r I 2,0e a Lj V 6r0ar Ou •06VC - L . •--.W - C- .0 C a- 6T — .Vr — YT nC 0 0.— _ . C. V u O 0 L a 0—C C Cp P 6 E C Y Ns .a. C . __ w s' 4 ' 0 — - E p Lp 6 3 d E 0—0 • i> L L p p L L 0 . Q . m Y.. — o CIO ..0-c - O. C ✓L V P O. V — 6 ✓ . 66 . ws6 V . 0 Of V VL L— E—✓ Vr. 0 0— V 6 • I . . . ——✓ - 06 Co 0 0 V 0 .... • Wawa L. . . . M C — !..C . 1 1 a • •• C:C a 3 — u u j u C L C- Y C -- Y am me; O T w— r P -6 ` -a 6 Y E a cm . - w C . O ✓ 0 0 — L — C P r ' ' 3E7- 6 VI3 • 0C O 9TJ— C '• -. 4 .4 . .. .•- 0 . 4 • C I_ W ^ C •6= OI Y •Y. 9 l r L V O ! C r T.Y.C 6 C V r . J 0 0 Y N 1 . Y t. . . . . . P L. • Y a Y O L C P-"• -.0 - • V r Y L u- E- co m-C - 0 C L C. 0 C 0 ti V L C. O✓ L V. I. C C - .- C e O 1 V V t P O.6 C' • O.r 6• L r a C 9 O a C- V V . W C_ � I▪ .. OTee .. r C .- J wC -•O -•C COP ----0.-TUC Oa.. .-4..- . j s Y ,.... ....=. T _ __ C . 0.... , . 6 u V. . 0 -- C - . .6. E..E. O -L--'u ,.r. . L O ID •C -w O E . - C N r• , N3_ U 0 — V LLV .. L9 Y .C . O X 6 .—•J Y— a. — 9 C 0 4== 14,.4:z1 P PY ! Y > -4•4 . .-. .4 P P 0c j N r CO -- L 5 L r 6—N 0 6. r t - - ‘ 66.) 91w19 T V O a V V N O ••- C Y•` Y O -- L u C • • • l L•J w>• _ N V P a— =u CL 02. 000 > O-✓ NS OVON N MYO^ CO C a _ 0003 O V< PN— V �.. L 'Cc. -"• L. UI✓NL CT ✓ VSL^ Y L YLu V C• '0 C. ✓ a V TY— L a Y � T O L 9 6 C •>i V D0 a • y — • C N C yp :! JSVN dLJ0✓ aJ, N a< >d > • F••u ° Yv -J 7p 1�b 7 ^JS ` L ° UV; al 0 NC ° L a<< L N • •a. VI° :' S C L°J ` —1•E• GN Y a6 9 d Y L I O N v V — a L N N L G O.- N V f V L 0 E C SY - VVNO .Y0 • LC9 0 Oa Oa 6�0' sel -a a L. Y a a a V%. V 0 C 0 at.; V V 9 Y Ia. <C Y OJ L 3 L C al ^ a <S a I ^.T'� N L� IA nip • o_. cud a•°.L.T.ov L a J °_ o Y_JV < Cs —.. 4. a0m V N O i...- 02.... C1.0 C U^ T V L Jr VP > C r V 0 a 0 C . ^9 L N V a O r .4.10, CC '+ ] — CI Y - 0.a—N E > C 0 w>9 Y^ 0 _—Y {i C C la tL_ CNJ EO 0Y OJLn ub^� 4 VCOaO� ✓� YV O > Ur• O 0.47 4.1 aYN = a Og.CS _ • > et L Y N J J C C U O. O O_ v V U L > `�_ I C C at- V 9I- V aC V 00T a_ O =a CI- C Cl C•911.- ae Vdw > >.. 01.10 C43341 C a 4,P C 0- .L L N V J 3 a- aaa ^ .. ° CO.-N 0IC, N CL• U NYJ^ O^ - air 0 ^ L J ^ '0 la >J UIY C NC FLU^ wd^✓ >y 0 V 0 LIa 1 -- L C � Y d^ 0 0 9^ 9 c 0 6 - 3 E✓ °Y Li J •V • 0 O 9 u 0 6. .. .. o V L a +d••VE•,-J_ • V W J 0 q • C o. N •r: -= %_ C co l V C S✓5. U O C° 7 U C I. C O.> O 0 3 05 -L 0.0r ✓ NI p�@aO— C It E 3COC Y — OMN i OJ V uI y " 0 `JIUC•+ N••SC DUOd a�PL a C Vo 1 CCD �•V 00 ` CO NEW �I L - C L E T C 0 a ••°r{` L�L V P L O 0 — V GI 6 0 O C'H Weal.all I V 'L 1L 0 a J_. 000C c_ >C U L C Y —..2 1.0 4 C C C O N Li CI L— , o .6 ill O U U0 •9 0 `-U— V L T 1.14-- V U V a I1 E V I 0'. K2 C NI'J 0.L C^ u w al 40 N I OI L — _I� _ E C T_ < O L_W O 'a U< 4 �j _ b C U I . CO 0 3^COC LI U a a Via.Y a C a C O 0 `� q N OIL N^ Y O MY O Q `O.Y u an S_ a a U -- L IL�. 0 0 6 0.L a_ - VV O fE CJ ^f4- CY-Y 0100 <I..0 _ �< • N_IYE J -1 r1M-Jr 6O UU 5_1t.#'J E<uY •P- ' - 00 Yr-- • N Y I-LL - N 0- aO N < - •g 0ao c LYJi 0o`0 °°...:�" c _> -0 - _> L• V _ -Plo0 Pa c C_ -L a _ :N2 ° san p JOIU� N_ CO °L • uYV•°"1V Y�r • mYVC r ' OC •JJ I- a - C 0 -....„0.0 . 9. 0-...... ..... .0C N y CU.-. V 0 .. 06. S° e eat; l C Y W - 20 0 U W - . ..IF,... O O -10 _ EC-E VYI ES._L a O. 9 LrF Y CV C •V• OtipC ELT o - Llr L_. O > a-• O•+ l NCa NS_-.J N6'a to Y UC •• a< LI 6 w H •L•J L V 9 O L L O V J a 49 .c V P^ J^ 4. O ^ dC Carp 6000CCL era a V.` Y_ O aaS O `•E--� 9'�• 6 capW 71La < 0` N j 0 0 - 04 6 Cr < aim oil= 0 a a al L 9 9 u u 3 u O r 9 V r ` - V -LOYn ITL -' a 'JU•JLOJs2�C 5. 0 N L LL ay a • `I u ... etc.-. .s. ° °_ q C O J . en a C Y t a L� i .-.wm- . ≥ N E a al LNr Yaa aJ Jar• by Y V` i1! i ! NJ co .N... T9 qL Cl N .—.r a.. < a vq C7 Ol O C' n_ CI w u r — °' Ca G. - •. °L v ea 4L m — C a— V cl° G- .`Lo I. L v i O C CIO V a•a o ��c a •u o C p S a o L. — .a.. Gs O E VO O T— CP Va _ >. CC u E a L J _ La o •7 L J N L° O N `c L a _ 0 alL Y� SV Yr °N� •Jq p O- OJ'J ^W ' EtLve 2 . e - NN a =.- 'Eta a " C.2O 3 C 9 C V V 'Jf` — •Lr C I`V, C: d C in -]✓ • a _ _ I- '4 11 - N � a - a L-' CI a V C Y L C 6d O C•• L a .. q V V - V _ C e at rii Iv u I i a a L V - L.F. K''u N O e 6 V O ` t L O r i... a T y Is. L O u• O O V O L II ✓ L .0 V,, 0 7 N LS .. Yi 0 ° ..“. t2 vu jl� IL.r O�OV- VaO- rU a � Y > V Oi ✓ yC- 0....-u al ` L P •a 'Er T V L Y ` C a 6: al.. N 6 C MI 3 SO C • Y Ca- O_ E a _ a .Up a a V I O _I`.°i Y 9 J a Y Y < S N I^ U^d a I. O N `a C " L O Y Y> ft - a M gg .. _ • 0cv9 � Lo `9 _ a ' c ^ c � igoo✓ a § . °, o• Oa v L'I Y al 4,1 IViCG_ t • L. " ciea �O O.O.J ` vV Y- u- � -- V O-• < >_ > L - O Y N S '� Y N V O u a s ' 9 y.C N O > V C C O V C L C • 6 Y T 31 CI- • a L a C•I • C. a V V O L r�� • J P` O V 10 Y V >>y 00 p yl r y U ' 6N _ ea l O r N O C C O. Y C. • o q V J r C T • O O a C V T Ea Y a es a N Va P ^co m O V T ° C; C ..I Y tip,.co.. V u q L W MP 4•'] O 6-. O u O -V Z .°.. T Ou • = ova CC C- � S� V 'a %I 41.0 Vp WO V 'I4 iy .9 via C + V- I 'Ip N N✓ p —-a Laa Y . W La i— La y—I Y U •V, i" A aC CO `Y ` Y ]€ ^ Y •L mai Y O w_• 0.21—..C y N 06 L C J to in VV I V Y J a a L C •N Y L Cr a Y Y a ~ ° w pIO •. in -t LY" - 'u,v. 60 CIM ; YOL co _ > VC L < V_ Y dl_ a6Crpr0 I Or wo v6 O OY N C 9-t,,'12.19 • • L -✓` •n E C V • w• '- • V O WU 0C� _ -- 00- .4-448 � a-� YLC ° � O L yC p 966 V O 3 ..C . Pau r w L l rg w . O. PP.,: C .... v LG- 0. 9=v 9� J CO gV•J'1 C— C •.C � P a:... v11- 4)••• C 00 09*a C w J 1•0 L C w-- .r v L u C. EO 2. E P V— V C `J — Y— V— P 2 C Y C 2 v C-! q 9 C Y Y O V 6 w T✓ P Y— 2 P V V C =_ V C 7 V a l C C C.0 E • O Y—E ° C V! >o a 60.- V- ] > 6 —< - O V 9 V- C1.— p a V V— V O 0 > V u 4101.1 O✓ v w q V ' L P90419100 C L✓ V QV W w V VG 00456 . ' 060.09. — ✓ 9 Y — w —✓ — C V ` L P t 1.1 q V VV TCC^L w— OY ^ 6— O . V•`u 6Ol OO •• >cno e4) lc- C JO Tb O C L 1. 0. .- CE V E V .V.L• 6.3 au VE-• O 129 1. 9 90 OIO 'r ✓ w O✓ 6 ••-• 9—rL j .L• 9,—.C C V V L CCO rYOv— dC— L C✓u 90 9 00 00 Oa 9.` . .... .j .“-'- '•— • V .r 9. 482 •C— 041 C C O V C O N . t. . > 2 y.e≥ TC .0 Or.- YYu J •r u C OOb Y r6 Y •V.rV OC YIC Cw I . •=0 CIEC S Y_— w • a -000.. .41.--V6 V V V V1 I EC d- v V L C w C E `.• . ° V C— u v Cc- 0.C V V C L 06 O •0 ✓`O O J 0 C J fi0 9 V I. E ., o .9 O w v •• v V L Y V V — w 9 31.-16. 0 Lo., L V.c✓ C O q n d a O p Y C a L V w l O P•i-- ` l l 6 V U 0. 6 E Y ; Y 1-0 u T G r_ -C O G L Y O Y r 0 L > V .4 0.9 w „G • J C O C O .E• L O • 36•• 00 O.C V E T T` 6 4 yV J — V u V✓ G T 0 Y GI Y ° V v E •En C °u 900 .4090E n w 419 v ` v —• N C N_ QY v 1. ... .3 ••• .9 w Y a u - — [E .. .C44 ✓L a0= •— — act ElE V . V E J L+ C L C L— u — E o 0 L- ✓ u VS' C o w -] V✓ V met 0..... �J L 31.141 V u Y.0 C 0 N• g✓ ° • VV O CC O V cow 90 y0— j C.... 61 P• uLOJY 0 VG O6-96j .. .... . n< 4.:1C O C— T C L Ca l T V CO— V✓ V V 9 ] C ]--•OpVVY� • -6 • C V• vOC 6v ° LV .9• O9V90 ✓—N — .— O VYJLC C .r— J 2.6u r ] >.u- . vV TL L w OO.u— J O n990.9 ,- 6 -- O TOt-'9 —7— 0 O � �' v v • 00 OS J J .29 J am_— ,. O O.OI wL C p E C >W 1 0 .••••• W C . i.y O w r O L 9G en W .V.- < q— • .9 O O Z 64199042 2403. — ✓ J N C <Z9 O C0 w v j CrE — CY9 V.N �> NE N '•JC—� O 3 q C O✓ E 6 O— ••—U' — ;76— V G J ^O 006.13 u WE Eo ^P O✓.T-4 W6Z , ewe o— e .6• -+6` cN— w w 6 V -•....L p V — C- N¢3; .-..- 0... ,.. -E..r C L S E v • o E w C r u ` c 0I.a U C.- U O Y ado,- , e O V V— r Y O E Y— V v d r V_ 'J W. a l g •O J v_>-C • E V u V OVE J V C V— Y 6 19 E= O u t •_ L 00 — '.• q'r T4)..641 . 6 9000 > W0.0— ., 6 6.1 .2-3° 901-10990O v7 O u L V •40 .• O01- • U L . . l= V O ' r • V U C C - 66902_-.: 21.0 C V •CO L V 9c0.- w L L T r n T _ 017 n V 0 0 0 0 C q 0 r C V 0✓ 0 v c 0 i d ..... 1J c 3 S9.910690 •0C . 0 ✓w 3.°I C C-E V J O C- V v e E✓ CN3C 3066• C- 0E2U CC CLEu VY.oE3s nyvEC•- V Cvi CO _ V C l V O - V C N vo .. 610 v 2-*.-4 L u 0 0 0 7 N 0 09— — _ q VV— V 6-- .... . . _ -1:1 =34.9 E 9. 0900 .26C-9.C 'C V V d V •0.L V 2 V VII- VII.-04.1C L V r C ...- c >, .0 O U r C u V W •+ V V •LV. 0..... V J P P E N Pv V .--i..p• Cc.. l Y L L V ' l C O.c L V u = c o C n✓ w V w >-J V O —C ClV _0 6 0 L 0 O99, 06u r 0 0 41- O- V V Vu O V 0.3 C 0C41 V L C V C V >20 9.9 V C J.. .u •- J V-- O L CC= 0�O .. •••00.92- L C ..C 10 V V 90 O 9 Y N 690909- - u 6 n� L C 0 . 6c n V g 7 ° V w V V.--.- 0 O.: • v E C C C Oct' w�✓ E v- E C L U.c V P V E E 0.-1720 7 v L 6 0 °.0 3 V u o.-°• S W -Y• G >a v• W r- 1- l 0.1 .41-CV. VI- = 6409- OC •.r < 001-- c _. . . .. T QT E1-2- - Ow a9 'f2 :.. q- .V - ..... • a =WC U I 0 .86 - V• VOID _ 0- Y L -• w o L • 3 O J V - w C V V Y O • OW P u r V V L_W .L. L`. r 0 0. M . C- J um 0. 9 V 7 0. u C O O L L E L..= Y Y C O.C . . 00 o no O C V✓ 6. u — V l ✓ 2. C O .` O u O E n V j '_ L ° es`—'.r_o °o Co 9. NI.. . . woo • 5Eq..r' cT — OVCU > — E- uw p-, p O C` o» J19 n u V .✓n C E C V O E L C u L ` > ■ LC • C O V u a910.0 .42-6. .9 V v u V_ > ^7 •- E S V C n t..C 9 V✓_ q.C U 6620 N-a V O O ' 9 Y O M 6. 3• 094.1069 r Y C V 9 O 0 0• 6 r L •0 n ,-L n0 C - 690 ••• •wO 9 .0 .1122000 .. >- TV-06 PO E6 001-1.0 C C C V • Y- V.0 r V O J 041 • 0 V N E C 9. 6-� C E.. w V 411 L W .-.-p O 6 0 L. C V 0 0 51 C ev ' ✓.._ °.E .L`0nL V a.. '" EV6 - EIe— OVE.ULG`0✓ Ya- 6..• e Oa) .0..VCv . ≤ 0 °0 •• —. E . .," .0 C• V C.L P'J L, m v_V V I C✓.L.. L.V V C✓•41 T_'0_C .O ". V — 0 w e 6 [n CO• u • 0 — c . O V V r 0 Y E q - C•L p 90660 O 0 E PL q C V 0 9 F L ' V C 6 L——C l V Y L CO...66 ° .... 6 C V ✓.. — V1-102-6 ;° c V q J V O v 0 J C 0.v • 12. 0 - l YE[ Y r . 3- ..0 9464) UO3 .. u COCMC O6- SC V ->.°.r O0V -- Y•-- v£4109 4 > 6LE0 ^ >C ..ato . 0 LCC -31 6 m O r _ 9 • C V J V V V r O r Y•0 .C . 0414.0 0 •N N C L a Y-- V C 6 J . • .960 - N Y- v C L C .L. •4001...- 61• l u L_V - 6- - u L w - . 0 0 u - V a 410 .O •0. -✓ O_ 226-.-_ NE...... V6 -- 116W . 'r V 6CL < C = VT N .•-9M C ........4,....p .O O - - y = 0.9.,2 =6 0 O U L V 41 .5. 51 "•9C L L ✓ . -a C a 1. 11.01. 6 ✓p. .. '9.'6.9-9.9 q L. ,16i y Y- G L ..: G- `w -V C w P n- V` Or PC• C meal.. -] V-- • 1. - • s 111 0Vw. 0 6 L- We vC .WJ' V 6.00.“Y 6 n r . J-L T Ow . • 41 . 3.0‘99. 464040.0.09. 69 =• 900- �J > w p • UP- 42.9. 01. 9 • 06900.6c- P. ]L - .• °u V - < ......90.-.42900 ..09 • 11 • 11 > O 9c 1249 T N v6044 ,00- 0 V L 7 N L Q 7 M V Y 9 • [L us x- 0• •••-. 6C661-01- 0 -. WC N P V 0 y C 0_ V — Q U • >.C 0 0- ✓ O L — O C<— C— O — e666 v ✓ C L-- VN— C LN✓ vN —o a rCY V_ Y✓ L 3 9 0 T 3 C C -O Owe- 06 ....- 6 • 5 .- U ✓ V✓ 6 t V - C J 9 7 1 0.0 L V O Si Si C > J 0C r L C V a Y T .0 V Q 4 0 L L 0 — 0 L 0C ` C C N L L N lV— eO—a SiCN Cu=0 L6e .O+ •EN O�IaaV -V-� VSic —_ uvu ey ' ✓ 5LE— O— O Oe9 Si _ V rOJ af ,e cl a✓ CV J✓ Y V r V I C > O.C�L L L L P N L a 6 U O ✓C L.-- via . Sc— O +• �✓ V y N C L— C N O N N L V r- O V Y ^'r O 9^ --wear G C`✓ V • L a 9-- L V C O N V N a O L v .C— Y L N — e 06 4 y V 6 6 0 c L 0 e 9 3 J— 3 C— 69 O r C 6. Y a a T ✓ 0 O T V 6 `— O V T V V 6 Si O— WOO ., C Si _Q— V w a O C .• V C_ L— Qa O l 3i6 .66 L a C P NVN L • 0Y • IO Nr'✓ TN NP—�V 06,...-• OV • L— Oa V JL V✓'O C-- WC OV _ N V UC •9C'- VVYO OCr 09 600V-- > 00 Q ....Cs.- a.0. 0 C N s= 0,... 606000640C-06s a 0 O a O ......< C a — V✓G C 9 L—•••. ^ G V— V N `nett ` L L % C. ' V N _ 0— YV N y ...•N VS-L -' a6Nu_ O _uy >�� < C609 _ �O ^ •- Gc • T6 •N yV✓ L GYOO l 9Q C6 O V� C O CV C6 y •C✓N C9N QVL GCL C S . — V< a.L.•VLO LO9 O N C O N . O C N V ✓ O I M.06 CS L _u O —N Y—_ C P Y q •.�Y a V1 > T•L — U N L C .. Si Vf - 0666 i.— U0aI. 00L 6' 5 V aG6Nate CCUILie Y 6 < 0<" COC e= P Si'.. L > N0 MY✓ aC'✓ JV .-•re N•.cYg3 0 . COO—_ NVPJ -0 6 .0 9V eve V9N GrOU.- ma 9 VV•V P' 9OYC ✓ JLL.L.'LN YN e =- 064. 0CN -4.0 66 •> V✓ N V . V 3 6_.y V 6 0 0.Y Old d C a V Si • O- > V NV -PL— V a 9_ Y T— Tq a VV4 O. O ≥� OLGL Lt 9 14 5 •N Y_ N✓ V 9 0 Q✓. . . . C-I O U- •••- V- C [ 9 3 V V 01=9V- 6 V;- NQ0 CVCr.r6 �' V•-.. =RN .-. C - al... C- VJ- C .r '6 a. a - Si 40-. 0y. L✓ QUO Si T V V60= 0- 6 e 0_ 9 C T L 0 - N )3 9 L V a yx ✓ e V - c 0- y On •' C L •O' e- c s '_._• .es 0_ cOU ° u 4yv. in=. N _ c - 9 t N L 6 5 ✓ .0. 5 0 9 9—✓ 06.— •- - cal y a 6 V— V Y e ..J.✓ "O'r- P ✓ e�r O.— T V C J' r N L V O C V _O • • > Y O C L a N N N gg_ C L 0 a O a.C16 V N L C V L P L '• 5 0.0 5 = T a L V C — v J L O 4 — u S L_-L Si = 6 54 5 a L T 5 O V C - C 0. 5V✓ a.a — vin. 3 Vv.SwCs 5. QVVC -.06U—.. .' 6✓ -- caL r. W _ 0 SI L O Y6 C.0.-a--L 4 O✓ V O N- O Y V_ [ 0 =3 , 0 _ N C_ J ,...0 , 0- cool- voodoo > N C r L Y YEW Y O C O-✓ L L'O V.- --o - 3 _6 L q 0. 0' 0 V. Me 6 O - y V N 6„"V L v LL CC > = CN- +• � C'" - YT> 00 � UNO ~ 0 N _^ Sy _ _ "• V _ V V . .0 O= 3--L _ N LO N a 00 -06C O l L a a v✓ O.0 V a eve, V p C e ] O N Si r C 1 Y— a WW - 0 V v'060 y_ V 3_ N Y.5+ C u V J__a 6 6`_`. 6 L V •y. C L V P O P u. C Q V C L L L 4 Q T v_r Cr Y >>0 6.—.+emu• 0_.r L u.6. 6 C N „ q••• Y y— L V L 9 L q vy P O✓ e Ga 3 0-9 y7-j Op =y., N GVNLN 6- O <W ✓LVY V.r 0 .V.Y O >aw -•O TdCCa C: C^ O_ w6 - NO w e y V— , 000 .... 0 .00—•— 0 ` ✓9 c T L N—✓ r ,•- 0 4 co N C N 4 Mp 9 a d O c vE 0 . v.......- 6=V O J N r L ad", +y. +V. Q✓ L O L L 0 6 O P O O eLi r Q L L P 6- C 0 L [6 V^ O Ur.N L 0 Y e!u._ J a— J C✓ a9 V<_—.0 N- V rO. VJ " 5 N L L^• 9 T •N N vi- S.-- C 0 r, Q 5 O -C r e_ vow V O C .‘ ,. .....r0 ye V u..0�. ` 6 N N^ q.- G 3 O V •V e a 6 Nv Ai _ 01 O V -5. V O-E L -9 ve L rt.= V V C O �.N L l_ ✓ L ` t0J N 4 V 4 9 C O V i _.O L- O - • T _ .iJ•.a 2 Q G a Y N✓ 9 ✓ 3 V CI- C L c.- C 4 > v sI wow V a O N C .C Q L O. VL U� E 91J YV6 Y .V'V LL6Ga�„ V ' CY OO ✓I ✓ c u O V Cert. V e °I✓� > u - p - - is ✓ _ <O e V C O O V- C IC C L- v V y •4 T -v... . 0Z V q-- 660.0w O C V ..j L ✓ = CUSS y C w T V c - •-•••• 010 = Y ✓ T r C -V UF.. J 1. • U L q` T C C Q Y✓N Z. 6I V u U U Q_ y _ lea=C L N -inc., al L 'J T y O 9 - 9 O •y.- L V L O. V O J LI V w-u d V N N J - . Y re • .. a V P Y a C y E V in O N _IN G O V g q v O L_ a L V COIr VILj a VC CNr6 'r IV NVQ ? N Jc C V L6Q VT= 6N Tre me 6Wu• >I✓ u .Vi6 Q.0i� u LCC T °-s - 6 rLOQ N a3.w N 06• 01 N G y C O J✓ C V C V [9 V 2 S ^I y ✓ V r C a NL. v K WY _ _ V 9.—. OO, J v e— y — U — ^ tempo P✓Y P L L;O L OL. L C-- WV O,N L V5c i V i. 4 ur u a a -• —i V L. c n w c Mw �L Y 5 V w� P N ✓> y p -- lie- 0" J V Q V V O V_ — V q L v N_ C V > Y a C6 cr L9 C f P rJ rVPy a— 6155 3a y J .0r V S • N L 5 L V V a 5 0' � a 6 L L 9 ^ 5 N L 0 L N 54 • P¢_ _ T O V O L ' .. e e — 3 G us O e a ` L r • CO V 0 N 0 y 3 0 0 I a L 6 9 C e r_L C 6 i .U• Q w- Q LO a O L N , 0--L — =.0... ,..“. t G o- .. 4 e — 0= C .30 Y re _ 0 P C WI N L a L ].0 c N N 5 r w60 a Q V vi9 — N V H O V 4 C Y L eOPI N J '2 L) 54= — at �a—auc9 Ya- IC '^. c YLytO1 - N r- P.0 C V V-9 3.9 9 ` .• J a n e •V. yr V 6 — Y c Y O N J y t r E Jr en pp !! Opp fe 8S .L _ u ✓ OVLN^ a G0V -so sumo= N u C V ^ G L C C u Y N ` ' Y ^ w G�•-- . cc - ex 6 —..—Q— ea— a 6 L N6 a9-- 6V.... 4 .•-9 9124 ; 9' • ' N V C N 0 a l_ C w .C N C N N y .4, . VTa 0 a.0 C C II G C r.C 0 L •w^ c 0 3 2.C a u Y r _ - 4 %.. C w'. - C V C 0 0 _ 'r' a. .at at. 0 a P 3 w 0 O O. •` V 1. O. O OM C 4` n V „ Y _ C P V J G V C _ Y V V 3 - J•' C O c O 0 +GO 6 < JO C a _ E L_ - _r 0 L 3 L 0C V a O V L O O a a V V G N V ` Y C y - a .- V u i v. a lia en C.-- • _ O_ - Y_ V > 7 u a V 9 .O- 3 a 44 C 9 Cl.4 N V C it- a J. V r C a-- L O C - 0. w.. O V O ^ O u C 6 O O < w 3 N •O >.a..- .- L O V u 0 u C N....3 C . O V N 8 -s u O 9 O V 0 O. 0 O P at 00 `' N C- C l0 •P•- O % Y PL LL_ NJ Cl 4 4V CP V PN 0•3 C ..a.C.. C p a G p 0 P L` O O I- at. p v+v w O p N O V 6 u - C r O -� 0.W C_ 0 )ai du 6i a w u IA C _ L 0` a C C 4 CL •9 � V CyC u0r CQyV y0a C•� C_ a 0. 0 C 000. L ' C r 0 O • a V N 0.0 a oat. ` Y O C a CO U u V_ V-•.r ta y p0_ c r utr u6a u ct at o L.6 �_ ` 00 L saw a _ a w0 •'. 0 0 IA rT q N 00 _ _ V ' pC r N 0. 7 - u _ L Y 3 L,• 0 . 03. C V C „CC C G 3 .0 a L F a C Cr 0.3..-o • 3 4 .• O L L O Q9 al • G C'u N E w a J .c— 0. -a u'u € V -Y V= y 3 C '`V .to Y_ 8 ' o C H w C N V L O C _ E V N C G ...-o L _ a N Clw as w •J•r .. P p a w G.I .....7, cV. T - ' V a L 'a C a n YN 'O- O- C- C Lp C. Loa l6 CCo a0 •E a a C'a Le uP C.- ell a • CC • . > 4 0 a CC a C V V. C a .� c L C a 'C J •'_J a a iri.- a.. a -r 0 6 6.0 0 P 3 ' p 0 G v W y O V C O C J L. C O 3 O 0 L 4 y Co- O. C S C. — L V C C a Y V 0w GI p-.'..N YON 0 L_ a.r a— .- LLw .0 LC LC Gl 0. ... 0 W LC W C—. — w -C r JN L .-.u0.... t- 'a w0 • o a9 0 V 6a ` L I Iv N u ~ V r _ O y a '_0 _O E — 0 V C `•C C 0 - y — .Vi V I- a a — — a r r— _ T -" 0.C C O a u nay a - 0-N CO .•-••> r a v la. dQO -u0... ....Y l — rpC •..0 .•.O Va ...'00— C V O.. V O C O C O 0 0 V C. v co 0. l l _ P v!-J•N O O O. •u ..E W13V L Y y t- o. uC,c 0 cc .i Cu,'-•. .0.. co..4 •'.. -,w V G O V. V a 0 0 '•. V a 0-a Y V C. • Y Ep'er • .00) 6130-d al....... 004. 3,C P N T C.O C L >•.]L N Tatra i s a•0- Y C O ▪ - a�—. L ' C U _-- O C N- 0 0 C a N O C C u La.0— 4 G M a— y C O_ r d C —O J.,O l r 01. 4.1 .Q V 9 V y-C G r r r y a G J 0 aa C Y a C u• f— O >V C V.. 0_ 4 l r 0.V > -_ V O.O L N G_ N w V r L O G 4 Q V C O c V r.c Q a 3 j y “ E...L a C .. N O C Y P —C a V O O C N J G — 0 L H 6- 40U Y r O C •J.C a V r V L E C O >l J a 0 3 y a •• V y V C L a V N C V O O L N V C 0 J a T J a l V T•L. y~O L C C twat., C O O-'n_ = C — u`C V N Y G O C d 0. V V O 061-03.0 VI YN . G `.L.. L • N u O O C O 0 C 7 c ... ... c0.>.=----' __ O V V u - a a '.V 0 .+ w uts . C O Y a e u T Cuero 3_G a 0 • V a-•• •.C , —.C ..1 91vi at COVE .3.-. 3.0 l • au L_ C— ." OC MCVE..rY n.'i O'J OVL� 4r >L I- E T 6 rV' Nu'. > O att..u r_ O C••� C C a Y V C •a wt. •c — V cab. •l "' —O a Y '.u L r E V O L-- C C. _C 9 4_ 001...- v Y ! +• 3 Y y a ` C 7 C O a VC 0.06- C CV 0.-. N •- G -V. •• > Y y V •+L a J_ w Y w C 0 .- 0,10 .4..C 0 0 J y — O V C L _ V - 4 Oa a O...C r C L V U O Y O L Oa aG N O C l O Tail T__ _ • y u V 0---• C 4 O c" C— L 3_ -0 E a 3- '— . . .... “ c O C V 3 u 0 C G O" C.V r C O <1.9.4 .9— a _ a L O a L V > 3 0 C 3 ✓LLOw G0•` 6YCO L'r_ C L. C. GNCVrY w T. •� OC u_ CV J C O r U. - L V u C V O G I•••• 00.— .S.0 a . J O.` Oa 9 V G C V.O 0 O r •O L 0 . 0C- 17“00 J C 00 6 > .0 C > U V 0 ••• C C- Y C O C • ' O y a E OI N 0 Y V P O Y V Lat 0 O .06. 00... 01—. 4 0- 30.C a. l .Y.. C y V u a O '•- 0.0.a O ...... • _0 L C...- L L V w N a "� G d V O C'O_ Cr' a T Y 4 a u C G.. C p Q r 0 Y9 Y N C UM . Y r V G_ L 00� VLJ a.-r IIV 4 !- Li Ca.CV V VC _ wY. ev gla C L.r OYV Oa OV O '.. C C C O_O_ L C L L V C ' an E. O a C O u L w C 6 Y O O l 0.0906 O 660- w O a L G Y C 9I N P l - Q.N-u • 0 v L €- 0 >. Yy =a t7vCL .• C >C . P 9 L L a a C.00 > 0.C O l Cana L Y C Ca 0.J t.00 61.......n a a a' V O C+G '•. w u.O �— 0 Cyr V SV_ L_ L N O_ w VT — ... Cl VL YJ y >C au_ _ p 'r' O r V u.r 0 J C C Y l • V V 9-0+ G N E V r C L O C w C C L_•` V — J—r_ T G V a L O u V _ r 0 CO .--. 0.v0O a1:1-• v600 .0 .1.-.0,-. 6C >.` a Y C O a ✓ 3 Q .0 0. u l L -.. 0 6 .0 a G a L u 6- .06.— •C O Y V V C'0 ' O a • 910.-- 0 y O u VV a •+N r u r to • co Y wi C >LV a es aOCOO— V cm.- tract• L_.. •. wa V ~ O.> ^.•fir O_ _ Oa V a Y J r u OL Y 0' ' C' a VC p C .•-••• C ^M 'r C= u O a a L V PC..O V C E l ! a c O L - .V — _ Canaan , u V •C au In Ep Cr� V� w r _ w _ Oy▪ u 0.L LCN. Isa. 6V C YYY G•Y•.Cl V M Y CaCIV • ' LCC r0 aa.0 O yu — r T > �! W - V_ .-.., .. 0 � •• •O• OC V C ON OY •V u.'u _ al Vva-. vt Q aGOCr•C GOaVYG4N�— N�•ua 00 N`r9CL rL3O N� Y•EC < Y 3a Gu SYwLrla G OrL G_ co .. L .Y.. LOa 0. a- 12e19 Y Y C C p Y_ C - a a - L C Y L L 0 W •C L 0 ` .C 0' = . uO 0 .. 0 a 0 0-•— O + yL -- -, C C an U 5a0 0 La 3 3 C. 4 GO Li• L GI✓9 u0•_ C VO.C as V 4 0 V > V L P a V J— O 0 C C'r 0 C- O L a .- w V 9 - - C C - U V— • L —E d r y......... v C- O d i V a 4 w O 0 43 ^- V 4 9 .5 54 O. L 43 — S Y GC w 7 C 0•0 C L co w Co V C L w C 0 C. V CO. —.- .. L G Y Co O.Y O V Y L „ P P o 0 a 9T V 4 I. 9 - eO.e w V V-- — Y C.— O 5 p q L CO — 9 0 0. C C O.+ L C 5 V OOO C 0 ✓ LO LED LC_V— — C. LC.- L— d Y— y0 EO POA 3 C wVw _9 ea LOO .- 0 3 .d._ VVC O.D T- 0 O C-.— C O , 4- V T 3 La O.Y — 0 5 0 C V - C l ✓ L- ••. V w C 6a a - • .C a- a Y a O 9 Y L • D.• -.. - 0w O 41•••• L.• 0.= ... ).. w - a0 ' L�� C C a U GI T V 0 r -O O C x 3 y 0 C O L a L L 0 e in• 0-• O- C a 1. VO 9CV a0 3. In U V 0'.] - • YL w= -- L --- - C..• O. 5C Y .• L L 3 V - -- - L -• V - L - O 0 to J a u ` O a E a T Ca C- 9 y - C C L 9 G -i a M 9 L we. L--0 L w L V Y O O O C-. co on p Y L C l 4. 0 O ea E CO'....e - d 0 u !G C- d e O Op = o C - 0 .0'• a a d =9 a w 0 a-n CL 7 O.-w-M e _ .0 w 00 c o 9 V -CO 9UC 3 PO V6V .0.C. >- - LL O- 00 Y. - ex - p O-. L P a O L G- C L L w -+Y aeon 9 te I. L 3 a C Y CCV L L w T - L L a 1. 0 V-. a O. .C O a — w 0-- 4 L a w 'ova L 0 0 O. 9 O 0— L L-. 0L 9 "E -GY r 70 c e o Y C C q V CO .+ L _ a V E L — Y _ P Gs• 9 ll L cm n C •- O a 9 0 w. T O O a O a a L a U 0.w. G- Yu Y . 4- as — 0 .- C O aV 0-. • CO YE 0 C — L— •rV Oi > L 6. di .. N O— t Ow l L l _ w — 0CO = E66- 9. C. D 0 - 1p0 L V C O V_ C L L 3 O - .- u > 1 Y E L 3.'a tot u co 0 O L ul - ~ C 0 - 4236 .V- 3 v C w ; (3 - Y .. O -.j a•Vj •-Cu_ ~ L ~ 4n G -C O Y a • p • 7_ 0 --.. —ace . —V — 0 _ > C Y - _ a d - .. O 0 — Y K Da L L > 0-+ v V > U 0. `0 w C V0 C w _ w'0 v 0.•.• 0 _V — C a G V --C E- L u - ww ....0 6. w 6.'O 3.[ 0 d 6 C E w V C - 0...a -_-a C > 0OC ccw C on wa E —La — '_ EUw j0 O 3 O L 0 115=- aP 31 V 0 0 L 3•. T 0 3 C S 0 u-• D-. V Y V L G 9 U V O Y aL D > ern a 0 V 0 O — 4 u Y 6 u a u C C- C 0 `L C j 0 O C C -. V-- Cr y h i y • y c a 4 - --Vj 4 0 U•9 6 U C L a tu C . C 0 4 0 0 -a 0 - L V - 3 a. C i -D Y a o a w - C - > .. 0 0 00. 0-• u a.O a •-- d l 0 a C 3' — 6 0 • 0 C 9 L •— .L a T a V E 0 air O a V L O O C 6 a Le O a L a L 9 E- P V o w - 0.V V C 0 4 0 Y C w C a- C. 0 p a ^ V d J O u C u C w a 0 Y C C C C L O— O C w L V V O S V 0 da0L O a o -' ,°. -a ca—° a O 0 w Y 7 a O a u Y 3 C L 4.4 CC O O V O v E N O r .C ) .--U1 0 Y > > V C O C C .O.0-V 'r` a L -. co c = U L — You vO_ � w a 0v • eT. Y w - 0 O c ao aL `` s c a.cV S M c c L O a 0 w=-3 L to e a a a— _ x C P 100 c O C- O M Y -. •J• 3-. — Y a u C �J O w O q C 9-+ V C ML Qew 3a G V—.r ... •LJ OCw C YC a 4 • 99 Cw PY 5 .1ra T 6.c 9 -. a V MOO 9 > _ ...40 O Y C a 0 w 0 w q e L •r 0 L O c V a a Y a L e PCO u y'• C 13 0 C Got o-... GO CL C C L - O C W O w 0 w 0 V O w.. 10 0 4 ✓ w J > j L .+ P C ` .Ca. a V O L N O w= V...0. C L V 0 O 3 > w ' u C= w ea se w a r w O a - 0- y 4 V to.kJ L O , S G O _ O O 3 w 3 .Cc CC a d L L.. V C a ..L. V L , u L L w 0 a ea ea 'v e1 4 •-a Lp Y .T, C N ICC. .. L4 -. `— C Lv g cw — L _ >w 0 Y E= v4 c — e` L Cf Eau °`— — co cc as coo a V- 0'0"1•C• ` V a V a Y L- L w- Oa a : u Y v .` Y C V O V 4- 3 4 a Y a C- EC0 O r 0 .- O3 O O O O V 0 _ 3 . V'r 9 L O > V GO 0 O V L V C D O O C 3 V C a C - - V VT U Y '0 U c V V r L 4 O O t > - C F O C GE Y w- T V 20 Y_ 0 D V E -' a O L - 1- C •^ W a• L V— ) LO L • `a5 •'• OV ~ 4 - — tiV O _ N 1.P Y .0 > ^ 9 C C ... 4 =-1 U DV O w fur — p a Y 0_ • O --.0 .n z 3 — a w — L O Pw — _-• _ Y �LLl4 THE .T..rC G vLY l0 V --L • •>a tol �0 LL v0e — �C a al v 9 V a ..V rC 3 L UO {,J „a a L L .c 0 F c 0 ▪ < O , 0 0 0 O 0 O - V • a G NI T a. • 9Z1219 —r /a a_ x ', jilt-" e 1. j-. 0I �. 7.--\. +QI. �- g s p N rl . ?5 ,r,— X7 1 ?. 1� y 1 I J, \\ Y L N Tr C C I P L r y J a L C C• L C _ 1 V— L.0 L O O Y „ •C 0=- CIC IL O- p O V C M- • - - - ea. • „9-y ✓ u0. „u 0 0 . =ioNL *I'' 02 V 1- C2 9 • 43 O L P— C 3-2 010 O E T O..JJ O .0• E3 -J . •.. so-• C „w Si T-'r y E y p Y O E - 9- a 0.v ..56 T N- 3>- C C UIVI<9 V „C✓ V V AL C- „ L V- E SYL_ 3- PM.+ > — L pr V 4-✓ A ea A W L V O O A Y .0 u L ✓ L A = „ O 0 r- V C „ N Y J- C L r N L W r— r V.0 el �0 MI C • d > Y _e°= - CYr C L V V PIC O a-f. V C C L O S N V✓✓ > 0.. ..C y_r Y L 0-- O V = N O O O. O O Y V"' L i 7j Vg`w V • P„u C Yr V J— O GG�1I�r C'r L C A a . C 0 L h� L O v S — Si--f O T C a L_ •✓ •� 0 O ! P T l L ✓ L O C Cal- a0-13•040 .A 0 pYII-0 Y „ S 0• -S Ju a y 'J 0.000 urn OUVO . AaCV V�L > „Lv UC'. — .Loco _ 0..-2 O N ✓ J P 0. 0 LI O Y T L 0` 0 0 SiY • Sid _iL L C u au 5 „ a Y „ .j Y N.Y O.V e 9 0 M e✓ • - CV— C T 9 1.• ••== r V✓ aC • > L d _ O V Y Y „e J C 0 • f a V I. a r 9 E 0.0 N .- A a— .6.....0. • e Y u-I• L C w a L L f V Y „—•O J C 9 A C L .- L (�I a O a 000 = C U E D- V u u !L r .0 u O V ' O' 0.„ Y e ✓ N y— V C 0 Y a a r 0 ✓ O O Oa V V C O -. 0 P O G_L .7— V r „ — „ V L T L UA O0 VL Si ea 0YP — N?I 4. e.O CON AllyL ' Tu • V C— V LG � 0� 0✓ a „ 0 00. 0 • ' OLN VVC0 '- C P V U a.-0 C = V • y C u✓ ` C L A Y „ II LL A • 60 C 0Y L a‘-• „ L a C A J 0...-; !.....0, i-.9 Y - w C V- -. • A a a 3 N P N C 0 0.'r V A �I y • 3 '.° 41”. e ✓ O-_ O- ie O Y M V✓ C J f C L i V 0 0, > en C y „ LCOJ C3-.✓ VLDa T A >.0. . L ' CL '- 0 L -r- C - O C - O L C ✓ L f V O V - O C L'.J „ Cr0 ✓ a > O ✓ .• C -C✓ r N U 7 L a r- „ L y a -L V 9 0-' V V „ O_ 0 nT. J ww „ 9 T C Si ' V W O 9 v O L C V V _ 7 .1 J 3 .I. O.J N 9 CO r 2 C V V„ - r 6060.0 - r OI A S „ ✓ .d N O L 6142 Si 0 r p C -- - 0— 9 N 0✓ Y L ✓— T„ co YA u A C >✓ f'V V L ✓ J < 00 r. °' O ` 7'C Si— • dE .O do qC LoCaNU_OofCe Cl -e 0E L vii p y A 3 0. 0 L a00... I- U Y. •E T N . . c., , ,,,,, .. U POI' A O C co - 0 V L Y 0.-.0 0 O L Y d P O C ry _ O O N ✓ a =-. „icy a d O Y V ✓ V m rA .O...C yr --.. _ •_ _ V LYY ^u LOLYCO 0 9 „9CT� r. Lc .Pr9C - r L .-.J•. - 0 •"'L0.az .✓ „ CC f �4... , C Y a '^ . ..c L.. v. .so L.. 110 C= 6✓ -r E 6 C c q= -IJ A V _ 0 L C 2 2% 0. 9 1C + 2 e- O W -.„.,6-...° O L - L .7 r- O T O L w J II a Y E.-L J-� C - 0--- • u j.-.C C O O „- O O C g a -.7,...— > C C r E - �i L- `N...r Y A _ L CO row E L r C N ..✓ ✓ E 0 .• 1 C .' V L a Si C- „u - O O T„ V A V.0000- '' „ e- „ N E V L C d Gr C- 0 V C ✓G • pQu at- HTJG nV '�• j 89G GEO VL�J .O.0 V . J r 0060-. 0. A > „ L L r L A > •-••24“.I. L U0 - „ e • ....- c.06 L O S 7 L >- Y ✓ 0. 4,.. . V °— C 9 r 0 N • d V 0 C.O.- A O. V 00.- ✓ V - Si• C- 0.110„ C —=.1 O • O r 6c L C✓ V A a •r a d „ >r ca. ., 7 .Vn. L.. A Vella .._ a Si 'P Si v- 0. O0l >jy C Co r f— A N J C L O Y 9 C L V CO L C.O- -c. 0 L✓ V • - AV N- AL '• „ V • „ A PV VO • r • PO 0 00. '✓ ✓ V Si O --- d y--w a a C0 • O- „ 6 ^C • V Lfa ... 00;LLu - C v - „ v v., V --C L € — C—+ L L L C c T 0'-a A_ L J in E W C—— O — V '✓ C.„— wP OLCO OC OVO V.O. LE OCL 0auta MI 01 • •°. a 9 — w O Y Y L C O V -.C p Y EO 0- O V 0 r V L` FO S P 0- C .2cO2 . :a L „ .co., ,.. 0 .4.O 9 V A— 0 V ... lava L — 6. ., 0 V '- at >t C V • „ — ,„ A 9 v N d c— r. C_ — CC C L` V L _ t a 2 • a O 0 '0.-- --- -- Si L .A�..L O V C L S C V • C A J 9 „— cCa = 0.40 L 2 0 T V „ CO „ E..,--0.-. 630 V _ C 0 O Y0.6- C— ✓✓ T „ _ — O _ VYL Er YP p — y — „ •- O.f. LY • • Ni0- 0 YVrJV I. Vy C_ _I Nr Lam •• JN CO SJ VC - OVSiO.T.r__ A al N—-.IV O. 41 .0060_CO M Y 0 a 0.y C 0 • V--- V Y w N Y Y C aw O C • S L 0 Y !Igoe- 6 0 fyC✓ L V•C GP✓ yr L L- y.. .a.. - p— V Y A 8 9 V J „ V • O Y L C „ d i E C C el e V — P•r O •e „ 3 „- T C . 000 a O O N O „Y.L. C a M _ 00a 0 V v L y L O _aCti u L V Q CI C r— N _ L r - V — „✓ J La- 6 c u P C V C a „ J—L if= V ✓— — .. Si L L r V E- „u 0..I L „ 0. j T - N� A •` E F V .. .. <2 .- -J v- >'0 3 r V w L 0 0. C E r Y O V G g 0 •L E V O P„ O.— — V Oa in C 0 > 09 0 0 O C >0-- L r Tyr „ • Cl a '. — 00C-0. 9 Jo0 0 �u9 C O -0._ L SPCC L V ......... ma YO W 23 .0. 64- 0. V • O". „ r T C _ e J ✓ u > r C „ L C p — == Co st et C^.' C .r0. q„ a0 u „cM C 0-Jia LvrO • 0l iv �_ O- a ✓•-• VI ,..3 .. C.J'1 0 O U C L r .—i „E U ..• 0a C C L. -O v V • C L --7-11. 0 0. 0 O _40-' 00 C P ✓J „ G A- s c:-- f • • ✓ O - C.H 2. C - -• L N O .O i.. O A T. r- C- V V V Y J Y 40.. V A L C A ...vie O L - too .. .. G C O o - „ 'r y- -- „ Y __ C `•0. ono Y „ fi Y L a 9 V e f > „ O V M E _ 0 C C Y u v L O C aa 0 Y-.00 .4. L f Y L J y C- O .C L J L V'- GC L L L vJ. O.C .0•• V•C 6 .0... 0 0. ✓—f Lt.' s V9✓N -- JrL 0.• •00616, 04•60UN 9'.SAe'19 -J G C V ...IS V 0 •V C Y ° y ] C 9 U O— 0 V - .91C00.0 , 1)O 0 D ] O 019 9 W L.C aa j C° C L + V.L_ S C r O— w co .w •• a o lOVOYO V >� cWo.°a C J 6 T w C men a Y u✓ 6 G w 6• — 0 , C L O 0 .0 0 C V ` .Vn N —_ L.c L Y • . Ui. C L V 9 6 Y 9 > 0 6— w � l Cq .- O 9� — u 'q I.,CCSO V . • 0 ' ] YTL9 ° l Y 0 0 r v o C L 1 J w r— C ° le. w Y V G Y O= O C T V'✓ L .ac. CLC' O r U 6 w —0 a so 9 Y L ea 6 L > 00'0 C T P V c) O 0 J E 0 L O u L c T.C a No —9G — 0 C 2 u e e: ✓ .. so I.- ^ 1 ✓ w a ✓ w 0 � C p 0 C V✓- u L 41 .- L T I. O V w .4-'. .O L C O V C C 4 9 a 00 E.--.r Or iC SC C. u°. La C CI® ° co.= J 'w 0I - 6 0— WO 4 co 41. P HL a a l C r CIVGL��- L OJ VD v0 ✓Ir- NPO Y N 0.9000 o C C J a 0. L- E G V C L_v 'J Cl° -V V0 sC^Or ' 1 -' w L Y0 •Ula Y0 ` 60C ]O —•C algal 41 w q C M V P a 6 C 0 i s o " 0 i = ✓ _a�p v G o at- C O O C .V C O C Y 0 w 0 vJ Y N .• -J9 .L -90La .O- 01. 0 .Q G Vl N O �� G.C—N ... wu to — ..• 900,69 U L.°r w LLV—v lVu L3 V V ` T6 C0 0I'09w4IU.J O— • 0.L., .fl , N 6 u I. 0 LL _ _ Q ° o.— O sa _ 9 L r w 2 j 9 Y .090 ] ••+ 7 2 tux- > w r C `G CO C c �7 r V 0 0- .r w n 0 CI Elei g CC 1 V u V _9C0 CV ✓ bJCY.°.< - - r DLr6r P —J 1 CO0 . .. ‘. c L w lo V w. N J 0 O III .. d— 'O 6i Ye uc a.°. E 2 u Co 0— V `O ° OS• 0' Cl '" E:: J .n .` b 6 Y L V Y •N Y fC 9 C 0V Or '`•]✓r 9V— Gr C 0. w 00 V.°..� yr¢ N ^v — 0 O 07 9 V CV 0 u c u —.. 0 _O C1�-L w u � 'u Y_N b V_ V Y S C e. << w T.r O I P 1.Otn G O 1^ L wCy. C✓ w n. r L .... r r r l — W T Y ° 2 0 O --.0 Cu O O V ° Y V ^ n .-. i_ W O. Or .wi. I •— '0 V - — Y Y .9 3 .9r ..0 '0 •—•—• 91 6• Co situ< Y 0.1-1 Y W • v.0.Vi •.O 9.L UU V = N c V O. Y.Y' V r V O O.--. u .0 no ° O Y °T N N✓ 3310 C Cl.. w w 0.y _ 7 0' YIL V�' L C j L C C 6 0 0. 400 =U00 '. >- 0.E. 9 •-•-o--- P'- N 619 9 a ; r _C CU •>-C w YLOLV •°'J w • 00= 0 O °•-9w0 N TM Tw O C C.-.. °•+ C U U C 9 N C CO- O Cl V 9 u_ r L l L C r V C Y✓ J C r w L. 67 •+ N T9w ✓ w V ^ Y.0 C` VC rL ] o r= ° .au—a- 1. "_0E on-aa C5' U w.. J•9 q .r co P M L C 0 r w • L D 6 w w a. u w Y G O— L C ..' 0 Y' C U 9 L 0 0 0 L L so P C I U 9 i�✓C .9 9; L 'C — V -0D.. 0 ° . 6- Y9006- E9 Dw y✓= wO rrC V � w1. w0 _ • w ova . v Y .. ..Jac is o —` .... 6. T. 000—L L G.. —O ° o N Y>•G. .1 at - I-CI 1. 0.... L a r °: ° L 6.. ° 6 e .—..v o a o L 0 G 1.V'a` L e = ILr. L Y r- o O C O w V c W O C 0. C E TL YL. 9• l 00- 6•• YO r.•0 0. V ^0—_L 000 S L ✓1 I w G r 9 Val ✓ ° ... ..° r O C.9. U ....✓ O Y P d V v V u e V w—i L C V C v.. .9i Y w V O r O.. .. V y U V C d L = 0 , 0400 . 00 v C V L C V V 9 w 9 9 6 ..-it ` C r a...-. W. 0C LYCO 0� 6V ` °Iu I. 9C O_ TC Pa0` L 4. CV •41 0600 ] U16 LVIT w0� 1 ° M_ wL 00 C y^ C C p] C 6 ✓ 0 NNN 9 V — r V j CM C s co .. C r— G L Y O O U 9— 6 G 6L L C L V ✓ V Lo ]N V 3 V L G 0 Y a .. 0 0 9 .]• P V 4 as aIL 6 ✓ V0P .CP'1C9 O C - 9 C✓ Y..LC 3 .Ca G'- ^ V'C C C C L✓ V V I ' 0 6 . L V =.C r w C Y v c° c w J r s `a — ° CVO ✓ C0Y.. .C COLY 3 C 0 lv . ' L 01- • q v9- 0o _t - 01. 0... Y eL- w P 'Oww c... g pa •oar m <IO 0' C9Cv �• OC6P 00V OL r CCO— V wL Cr—_ -•�C C9 C9- r en r 0 ] L - C 9 _ L ° OV L"% .5 6 C . —• O 0r .10 CV Y6CM aVY ] V' 0 0 7 0 CC m no ✓samoo-••' .Ye °IN..v 6`_j .. n., ...,...= Y",C C w 9ve==Go h 0 C F_ c = � > t" T 0 C w l __ i S = L T N —0 = C 0 = CO U. Vim .-G�Eu zl•°i o SCur ] rr ~qY 0 adan a- 2.- 0 - C C 9 9 r., = L .-C 6�G 00. -- 6aL LL L -'O ... E 9V P. Cl.o .-6u ^V..-6w en - _ O✓ -VE• G- CC9 O. C9 �0O� C =C2. -1✓ 6- v6w VV -Vi °CS - ^ C a u C Y w C C•+ V CpGC G souli V L •G `-✓ V w L V L • 0 a L r 0� w 0 V `C..C i•in a C O C o n Om as 9 < ° e i`e u" a v 0. 9212,19 • 1.C O L + a C 9 V-°^�° -m V V-•]u t O O L C O O `Y b T.n°• 9 C al L T u L V r S u CC C u Li., V y v._ .... 0).••-. . •+ C 7 c + C ✓Y d w V t N G T V O - L---J-1u C^ .1 — ... °p q_ ] O a T C Y o ....4J a aVO C-6- LY✓rVaO-u1 0•u C. oc'•'L u ]G� Cl. CA✓ • VP5V o• - ET- 09LL + O y. '• _ .:2 0-✓ in G V - L 00 C V Y V O.w a C L 0 9 CI. •' •J d 7£C dSC 0 6 .5y0. YOu" Co- V V0wr >C • 0 C6uL 7x�• �J e '� O Y C N L_'. V V-0 0 C---. 41 a- -. 0 L V ✓ 0•V•.V L C •°• ° q 1•0 O GN V q V - V y T . ,-- 0 V-7 00- ' O 9 c•-•--. 05 ••` C a to _ Oy. Vic V- O T O •l a L O�i 7Lti! L J >q 'u...Os- 1. O.0 aQ o-L ea a CV6 06` C 6PJ `✓ u C S 6• OM L Y 9 O - 0..... .] C✓...... .a l O V 0 O aY L 0 L O_ 0 L Y ^ 0 • V I V_-^� O r ry • J V 6,• r .... u • Co 0L O Cy .Li• J_ CJ • CY 9_ C C I 'uCC•u°•- 0a6YC6. ✓ Lu YONLO` 3wM < v� C < q 'q _ -J.. PL1 6 6C - 0< • 9 O 6� ..� O q- Y • C 0.w u i 6 w c 4+0 . 9Y in VC VVr—^.5 V.°.. .. T a.- C= GY 0_v' 0 NNM C0I. . a' _ •••••— *Ceti C C. O _ 9 C 6 -•a a 9 V3 V 1......•• [ w ••°-a v C L L C C > V--9 a J + L L L 0 y ] 1...all! .C 0.C C C L •CW 6 V C 'Meta0 C :u w C O V—•+N C P V a C V w m^ OI T° 13.....-• OI T CI -0'--- 5 •, • T J 0 CIa ] Pw 6-- o.— c J O vw N!Y 660 al al L UN a C O ex 6 4 C. 91 L ul w O Y-74.10 .0 in 0 u✓ c b u 9 0_0 — a 0 Y1 M Y al Lti.0 p p - N 3 V r 0 C •5 —I'— C V — I tic .C.. L V V C �i O e L C iw q c. aL C✓C N ru q n C Cl�L. C O CONGO — ] c C r — -o0 ^ Y `I.I CI_ E✓_ ° _• - w .ripw > d_OC0 °6II-C�c» v Cl.. y 6 p @ 1• C C .1 O L G- 6L'- • Ql b`- O T ]I V ] •0-- P L a00-0 o1orV = COO_ wE- V TJCC C u -. - COr •• C6_ al ry .C I.O'1 i]•. O- 4.2'._ CC ._ .>rb y O V C✓ q N+ u > V V.. .).- 0.••• O VC C T GC L T- • 6 03...- 6.3. 0 O P u 9 u O- CO Y C V •u n W ] ry - e_x_ 0 9 _T G C u 9 N Yn 9 a. a u -- +ry .e.0 cory C L S 1 C 0 rv ' L C E_ ° u• ..9.2 L Sy _ O b 7w` 9CC0T61VLbJ PV �•-.� O ° Y - CO O- CV w ' L L n < N•°+ C O- O C CC O 9 M J 0 0 ✓ P T. Pr •- 9 P S b x 0 T 9 r6it3 0. `- N^ J.P"• '.CO- -.q Cr- uO. ^• ..w Yrc V o-0.• aCYC _N -Y U. V d_ .7•Ow VL V e-L• ..... •x V y f,..-----:u C C N 6 w-YJ L- Y-_ = 0>... , - w 0 L C V G V _^ _.J N oa C 0 _ V V -T N _ N J O CL�u N L Lei = O u _ O 0 Y uV YC^60. - Cta - - J_L1 '�5 1p_ C. 7Px. O VCC O ry ..• Ai V6 Eu -L 6000 ....N 0C 'V 'b.' TOV 6C;P.0 < w i OO'✓ + L OS-+ 0I_w GN 60N - 0. 0 VIY....u•O - c -s - CE Ouo mu •wIC -L ≥ C + >I' CC 0 --- 0-00 u 0E- O .wd.. [ 9 PL or- - o^C M 1- r C-i- u r T J L1u O V ] ->O-a 0 .]• u- Y_ .- L Y ] -" C -it Cc...r. u ad c,` a C V CS to CIL VC0N N 96 - L ` VI ;03.]a wO ° ClO .. 0040 •oOC -I✓ V L r0 °'CV a) C.= cCS V✓ 0 • E y C 7 u • w w u d b Jq O 0 __ w6C- - ~ 0N.CI Vu d - COu > ...Cf.. a 1n N 1aI•°^6Nu > _� L < > C C NO i'uu OC _ >- .`• 1q<0 cs w 0 `` O' q v. en. > CIQV ` a.Vi Owq Q .m.•LO..°. • '- 0 ry V Vp'�6 1 i i ° •L• w C °-1 Y °; .-< dIP S3C 0 ' 1 CP. a Qm IL_ C C TEa C J. 6 0�6'uu o 9a Y O- ofs+rr, u Io- axE Ou CcC O .^ O..-: V V d V ` C c t• - S C Z C O 0 V w C C C 6.0 �. O O J _•d qI✓ u V c C 0 iv 1 Y .•• L a 1-" P V • • C ootsz V O `O✓ ` - L Imo• - C VC L C O NIL w 6 2 V 'IC N W w O a "I O Y O r u 6 .C -0 C Oy O v6u v.a VO< La OC OS.. 0 y „ wI CC CCC .n ° - kV C • CIDN 66 V qT_ ...IC .. CO•` NC_J 6 - 0 CIYOC0 •C 1I o'. —_9 a Su SFO — ••.- °.. �d E O C •V C C 01 C ° CIO Y O Y .nl.r y Y u O r u` r. .`O Clayu y '. u rva OI JwVo . 0 010 _,0 ,CC.` a CO — ry e _ _ — C E Cl I°1m Ls-0'—.O >I —C ] IY U2 u . V . :to _05, OCd 72...c L_, --c-r. 0 7,�.J r ° C 06 C O — 0 0' 61L U Q S— m E O Y V-J a• CPq v — C VIuI aO<6 •.. — 6Y—.2Y -' C69w 9a —ear IY C� VV •`r 0 uC0 ✓. N� V I l I..C —.a N N a 9 N— O O Viol. N i • L •.1 S i d C L . Z. V 0 CO au VIOVO •ry O — CO 9 _> T�QO rv 'C l '.LC u— Y06 as w w•r S 0 L Y J O r o . z_ 4-.1 CO` c' _ wy. SC r-'d..— ° o_ d c6 - < V o •4 — •-— .0 V N — O O_ V✓r N — _V`J ✓ S III p 1 >. Y✓ a J O a 1. WO LIC'YI1 in `J6 ..0c +4 I_aC .: SS ' 0VY V'— m LiC. C C C.oi" `.-OC — o • =Nr✓�•y ' N°L —'93V, 0 NCC — V CC U �vVVi N✓ 'r. COC 0. > — C — N— WI st la Z•CV C a na va co 4 2 L m L N ow IC 6- C4.1 Y c y— C•"J1 cn •L• so-L• 7 YN .P.•.1..CO=0L-do L. 0- J o0 6 > 0 ut —ry a+acv q 6 9 ,12.19 =C • V V_ Y_ l 9 w 7 .4. w Y— C=7 C r g d^ •^t C✓ a O ` an 6 a 6 '. • 00.00 ,— 9 r a— P 9✓ Y- O C a L a l 4 9✓ V_—C- r 9 v , Y J 7 w J tJ — 0 ^ Y L C J a > a 4 O O—�P u Y V ✓v w ' V Jl•r O aV N c ! oor— u Y L; 0 7 L O L O 9 r p' N �V a r 9 . •N 44 a • V a e-N _r L O O Ca' l a s O pj n N L T Ve WC 9 Nn >, -6` � i✓ <w....a. YL CYEO• o�• Gi0 JC L1.r a J CLa aj .•' OLJ -L, CJL WUL NO V= O_— _ w •- a � C O r J J P V a C h i �Or N ] J T p p 0 i`i• a 0- 0 , 9 a 6 4 0 6 t� 0 9 O ✓ T— V as 0.C — C V a L C V r O— 9 41 V — ... can. _9 g O L O Y L L P J 6 5 N u• pC V w a a y0. c L VNN✓ a.s. .. C V V - 7 0 ✓ C -_ w L a P M y✓ w > C — w V L N >. C•0. C V 60 L V 2O 241 a •-•^ O V— ` 31.a.. p real p vw. O� lw V O 0�9 CV wC Y vV L 9••• 9r —^ V Ym✓9441 @@C V60 ] r J • V Y y CYm CVYVea L Y — w O .0 7 w O 0C= •••-•0 N • 60C C '!3 C rJ c O G y y a a a 9 a •• co..- a a, 50, 0 •5C - 0 2 C Y V✓ r L 4 E m ..• = 0 .� — a=40 0 V E O >a v.. Y L 0—40i 5 . V •-• Y>a w C ) •m C 9 •41 2 7 O T L L al..0 O C'r a •a w ..43.•c0 .0. 44 v.N L u v^ CYJV -- O V 2 4.• 0>M> • aV.• V76 -O- 0.01 J -a. .. Lu yM r� 4 V OY_ u7 Oral r •c Ou0 �- y- • T > L w w % a N - r•V Y•r !9 .-- V L C M•-- p a 9 c u a C w V L• Y ^ l-P C L V°a J L 9 •N O. w C a C N l ^ ` N J O C - • O 19 O-Y--L>N C V 06.= cat., - L .... f c C'r 9 C o L Y we — e ac Y C a T a J 7 -- ^ v. Y w c.... ✓ a ^— ] — a < Y -- 2• a a =w w 0,4.- LO 0 C •. 1O C--r - ` LNa -O O•O• a Lug c� - . C..- Oa La 417 7- w L J- O - c3 ^ es CO P Y O -- 7- w -a V P c -T p !9 C ! O CV•N•1 L ! V J in C a r - - Y O C 0 C E . QL u •1 9✓r W L r C 7 Y •—.• a N � 1 0 f L • O_ Mal Y w P V w J a a O 4 P L O V N^ L O 0 - w _ _ a _ ` c T 4 41.4.V` 4 V a 1 O C 00 we Yw Ca ✓.4 V✓ - r•O0 .. N • wu9 LE. 4- V.'•^ N 00 -L- C-• C - lC 'jp CO3aw -T = w L`•Omea O N Pu O O O 6• S O C 0000 V `O V +O r l l O CC• w• ` C C N 7 O_ .. V CO .-.cw � 6 �c_ -.O_P✓ w Vll jju T• >q V� — -.. .. �in T T F— vs E C V g V L 9 O w V vs' L w_ a ....Y l 0 O 1. e a- v .. v C 4 7 > '• v^— l h r CI Y.• a O V C •a C N as V Y 6.. -. 0. 900C .].L=• 0. 7 41 v w-.r •r p p r L w C V •+V 0 G N a O a 6— V iJ w a • • 7 L w 4 >L >w w Y P O V • l w 4 T L C L w V . L C O 4_ 00 T C C Y >L J a_— V 0.C_ a u V >. C 0 V >Y- l a w 4 O. J a u_ V L 4 OCr"J]ra.—.• � C C , ic tj r . 4I _ LC✓ — C C8cv�� a•—.• ^ 0 0 T 00 V O C a O 0 o- C >.. >w C- a C7a TL Ew > CI 6. O O— J OL CJ7l .0.0 '000` a+ _> — C J CC > r — C > 4 0 w >> -] E >0.r L C wO. 0 C a W c ..0 a u arc .0 es L'� a C .C • - - O +9— 4.0L0 0 1 •.` la Cl• 00 a B PS w4L 9CC- -• 0 •Ca. C 0 4 4 0- — O... yaw W " Y a .•V P..u• •• Ou al 00•V.l • 0 0. L0OI ..0 • w •C • aa.—..• c c.•` 0.- ` O 0.-.' —a.. •• 0000- • VC•aw O`a w—.- 4 0 O O ot o a c•C O r O C U•u— O - — r=-l J L^G 00,0• 4.— : L CV p o LC+ co lc cr •O pa C — L .OF.V —0ja. CLC - .o_wL Vc 0 .opG✓co .c..— Y.—i 6 >0 c O O 0- 00 .4. 7Yp•. 3 ; . 7VG E aYa -Vr [+C0 -VJ C C60i r.C 00 C6 al V ..t CL Y.L+ w..6 �— I. V_ . 9- 0C — >n IC E•• 0.V_ C 0— l cow c w a a Y > E. 0 a L a. 4 C a Os •r a 3 V 6 L L 7 0 0 O.l 0 0 41 3 0- l .c C O• 7 COY — > L a 4. - pl..^..L. 06 . 600 60.` 040 LO 6 CIC a C •C L'8-0 CI a C. — 0 l y c ✓ C >V y•. E 1>0 0 C^ C u'a 0.>• 41 0✓21 • •-O,.I>0 >6 .Jr CI 00.-L L .. 010>0 V a 0I w O C L.L. L 41 •0 22 .•C O• a1V r_✓mC CIII COW uV V 04 414w 5 a- -•I r >�Zp LC0C N LILCC0 -• AIL JV V 91L CO CI a a.11 c OCw6 0? a 0`es b 01 Cw r 01 Nra Cla0 al0 0j , 0 V 0 1.1•1y Lew O • 01w 0 e. 6 011O •5 Y- O'L- a - 17-• C ;- yy.� V a CF•- V' at: -9r -t r•0gG - , > a L 0 Y e= CIO 3- ! + E d c- e it d` r N 41 r Y w C; 0 Jl <I Y ]- NL dal Cl l w .O..r T • r a •9 C r O •- <16 O 4'0 w <I C ! J V L O 9 Y J - c 3 C 42 C -r V_ 6 C L_ O 0 w 0 J^r- O L •L- JV-L •.c psi Y .•• V •rlr - V [ o u y O.. f s a - 8 6 .:... -p05 .2 w J oo w a M••• •n a_ 7 .�✓ a ^r a• N C L y r • 6 0 � N e ai V C•L 0 .C • C•C C •0 0 C•O O -C C .•. C L L w.` ^ C O O.= 0 2 6 0. - 0 W C V O C 0 P> S 0 C O S O C O-i E e S O C C Z 0— apr 0— Ca 0— G 0— P O— V T• 0- 4141 • O— r 00 0^u r Prr Y9 -• P✓PO ✓ 0,P ww rP90-'- • rV as Lr > o 0 41 LC • .ar. ` 43 C— c .. . a— -- — pp . . . . .lr -- .✓ » wee- woo-ow 4-3 L Y•(J- IC 6u L i -C L .. . eta a O a l LNCI- 0 0 y C 1.J a f T`0 0 vn N l Ne•L.4.Lp . C N• 0L•V 40.56^ N V.. N 05— N ta 011 6 as 3 V P.>.NV _ 0 O. O. C u 0. pia : C. 0 6 CI-.0w C. 901� V a .c use N a _�MC t<O am w'$5—LLB w-•9•'1.. C 0-- JL—N ±C.ZZ fl.0 f vv..---.3 5r r� — vC OOw.L— 09— V p 12 - 9, 49 • t o wr .�O^— uW_ //I Y �nw I 0 L J 6 r O N r I W . m v e N a 0. 4 V Pi.O r.0 ` Ya ✓ 0 1E0 u \ IS: ry a a. T_uj . c. .s lV g o P M O w C O OYo w_ L i.£u irr� `O r<. O vWi w �L¢v i o V mWi mtta ]� S •C V u W r .. 6 < r ' ‘^ N N O •� O = % X C V • •• •L C V V 0 L T — 0 r 0 0 0 L. C 0— . e L V al a— P CN L9'4- •� Y r ` y � T y Q. r 9 C ES, - d a.... s4,04 2L— .c.-. al P CM— P•+ JC e. nVL a C C O e.t.a•+r- f £ r a K. N 9 L T a L a Y 6 u O O u 9 .. a V r 9 a — v. E C L 9 u m 0 J `• G a V.`— M O O. E r a C Ctilte. •C — Y L C 7 O r o 4-. 0 Y. .. M 0 • C. 0 L•p... ...r 0 '- 0 ..Y _ O VV r VC C0 r 0 E 9 0 . _. ti 9 Y > d >' o. .- a.. Y Y T C WC P p -N V p C C' r V V o w in... so O C OL P N L ]O. E ` \n O r `L) V 0.00�I V OOYL M.C 0.r L6 TT a r ='.C Gwr fly VI C ON Y 9 Ceti T.r 0 L,1•.. r.•. Cu. .L.= J l Eel . •IC o I.- V▪ 00.C 000.J' a 0 Ill^ COO •OI. Y9r V .. P- V - - n1O V Y a r J-'L 9 0 II C .n C 'J u T l0 0 ••VI 0'r.- C 0 V•+ C -' O.. O V r 0 9 u C 0 ill C` •.r V.• T - C .C D O O J 4... . 0 .3.• a WV C-4.. N ON O C. VY- V00 O. 0CLLu iw .L. rO V O 0• a .-• al _ m . -< M r la a O.0. Y V 0 0 3 0 0 T— N_ un _ — Mica O L O = W- CO• r O. Y 0 CCU 0 L 0. r C. . YVmOTa a.) a-LT ` ' Ea N • N V • f\, .C L N C— v.0 L r 9 Y—— Cb..•.) • IC t. YCC OCC... -O eJ J.^VVr Vr0C- M i OC.-.r.. L0...r CV 0- wO r- C 9 9149 REPORT TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION-STATE OF COLORADO-OCTOBER 25,1991 BY CINDY L. BLACK, BRIGHTON, COLORADO - 654-1470 On June 7, 1990 at 3:45 pm House Bill 90-1327 was enacted. The legislative intent of this bill is to reduce overcrowding of state prisons and jails. When this bill went into effect the Division of Criminal Justice's projected figures were empty beds by the end of 1991. These empty beds cannot be the results of prison construction because a prison cannot be built in one year. That leaves early release. I'm here because I firmly believe that pre-parole as established in 1327 is an early release plan. And early release is devastating to public safety. Last month you were given an update on the status of the Commerce City pre-parole facility by persons employed by a private corporation that is contracted to the state department of corrections. You should also hear from the citizens of this state that this bill and pre-parole directly effects. I assume that the #1 concern of the Criminal Justice Commission is that the people who break the laws and wind up in the system come out as productive citizens. We all agree that effective rehabilitation is the goal. I am very tired of the accusations of being uncaring and heartless. From the beginning we lave been beset with a blinding smoke screen of self-righteous social service platitudes about the merits of rehabilitation. This has effectively diverted everyone away from the real facts and issues. A number of citizens, including myself, decided to attend the informational meetings offered by the Contractor. After finding that our questions were not going to be answered nor were our concerns to be addressed we decided to begin our own investigation. Terrifying - the things we have found out are unreal. Because money not public safety is the bottom line we have met road blocks and obstacles every step of the way! AND YET THIS FACILITY IS STILL NOT ON LINE. Until I found out about the Open Records Act, Section 24-72-201 CRS it took me 3 weeks, a month, countless phone calls - finally I would receive the information I had requested. Now that I know about the act the information I look for and request is always somebody else's responsibility. I receive a piece here...a piece there. It's a bureaucratic shell game! There is an element of the criminal population that cannot get through the community corrections screening board. This is the element that is keeping the hard beds in the prisons full. The legislature needed to do something and the options were few...build new prisons or change the parole guidelines and create early release programs in conjuction with these guideline changes. 9syi2•19 These changes in the parole guidelines will allow a larger percentage of the hard core, repeat and violent offenders to be released sooner than they would normally be released. Along with this a 90 day educational program has been invented to teach "life skills" to these people who could teach us more about life skills than we would ever want to know. .At one point the pre-parole facility Contractor was in contract negotiations with a company that has a juvenile rehab facility in Brush, CO. This company, Rebound, states in their promotional pamphlet that the average stay of a juvenile in their facility is 12 months. 12 months for a juvenile. And I'm suppose to believe that 90 days or even 180 days is going to rehabilitate an adult that has been incarcerated for a long period of time. And not only am I suppose to believe this but I am suppose to feel guilty for not giving the pitiful offender yet ANOTHER chance at rehabilitation. This is not reform! Along with that bill of goods being sold add the story that these offenders are 90 days from parole anyway. I am often told, "Wouldn't you rather see them get a bit of help before they are released instead of just handing them a $100.00 bill and a new suit?" The people coming to pre -parole will be 90 days from parole ELIGIBILITY. Or they will be people that have regressed from community corrections or they will be parole violators. I am learning how a prisoner's security classification becomes minimum and minimum restricted so those terms don't comfort me in to least. And don't forget the escapes from boot camp which is another 90 day program In addition we've been studying the parole guidelines and earned time. Another outrage!! The parole guidelines and earned time seem to go hand in•hand. Time is earned for making your beds and brushing your teeth!!! And more time is earned for not harassing your victim either verbally or in writing!!! Please let me repeat that: THEIR SENTENCE IS REDUCED IF THEY DON'T HARASS THEIR VICTIM! This should be EXPECTED of an inmate. They should NEVER be rewarded for doing what is expected of them either in earned time benefits or any type of parole consideration. If anything they should be punished for not behaving. It's time the public received the truth about sentencing and its real relationship to time served. I have a list of the clients from a community corrections facility in unincorporated Adams county. There are violent repeat offenders in there with escape records, 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree assault records -even convicted murderers. These are the people that HAVE passed through the community corrections screening boards. What are the records like of the people that CAN'T get through those screening boards!!! The people that will go into pre-parole!!! As I mentioned earlier money is the bottom line issue. How many studies have been conducted on the cost of crime in Colorado? What kind of statistics can be provided as to the public's cost of crime especially due to early release. I have a handout of an article by Economist 9 ;1249 Thomas Sowell that deals with this very important issue. The COST and effect of crime due to early release is another major issue that no one in our system will deal with. The state wants to save money - the private contractor wants to make money - is it any wonder that the citizens whose primary concern is safety are being ignored. And yet we, the citizens have already had to spend thousands of dollars in our efforts to be heard. The DOC's contract with the private corporation stated that a conditional use permit had to be issued by June 7 or the contract was null and void. I would like you to know that even though the contract hasn't been cancelled there is still no permit because the CITIZENS DON'T want it. Hundreds of citizens froth Adams county have been working together for almost a year now in an effort to keep this facility from being established. Although we don't have the luxury to hire 8/hour/day employees we are still accomplishing our goal. We have spent over $20,000 of our own money, NOT corporate funds and it looks like we will have at least that much more to go before this election in Commerce City is over. The worst of it is that a large portion of us won't even get to vote in the election. I have another hand out for you that is a time line of events to give you a small idea of what we have had to deal with since we found out about this facility. We are not the first group of citizens to fight this kind of facility and we won't be the last. The advantage the next group will have will be the knowledge and documentation that we will provide. And I guarantee you that we will provide them with every piece of information we have gathered. The general view in our community is that tax dollars are better spent on tougher sentencing, more prisons and EFFECTIVE REHABILITATION DURING INCARCERATION.... NOT EARLY RELEASE!!!! 91.249 .c c•� t �� l . I - • ' 1 l . k i l' r• �1( I it !k i l j ' �� k When the State Legislature passed House Bill #90-1327 they imposed , a great responsibility on the state agencies in regard to contracting out to a private profit corporation the responsibility of security, education and welfare of the inmates . It seems to me the larger responsibility of the state agencies is the safety and security of the Public and also, the protection of the rights of the impacted Citizens ., In the case of the proposed Pre-Parole facility, the impacted Citizens have been denied their right to have a say in their own destiny at the polls , via flag pole annexation. There will be an election in November, but the community of the facility site will not be allowed to vote, as the contractor chose to annex into Commerce City when it appeared they would have to address the concerns of the Sheriff and the Community Corrections Board in the county. We believe the Commerce City voters will vote this facility down but that doesn' t solve the problem of how the State and the contractor have handled this project and it must not happen again, anywhere in Colo. Let my fill you in: In contacting our elected State Officials we received a common responce, THE BUCK STOPS WITH THE D.O.C. I believe this is true. It is very dissappointing the way the D.O.C. appears to have turned their head and chose to close their eyes to the problems . Let me give you some examples : 1- Some conditions of the law, the bid and the contract have not been inforced. such as the contractor having the approval of the local Community Corrections Board, community concerns addresses, dead lines inforced, etc . 2- The contractor representative made a malicious, untrue attack on a victim witness . 3-There was an attempted, untimely obstruction of the opponents legal council. 4- There was harrassment of signers on the 1st referandum by a firm hired by the contractor . 5- There was an unwarrented attack against the petitions of the 2nd referandum. 6- The contractor representative has down played and misinformed the public concerning the types of inmates and felony convictions of the potential inmates at the facility. 921219. 7- At this time there are attempts to intimidate the opponents. There are many more incidents . I am shocked at these activities and as I said the primary concern of the D.O.C. or any other state agency should be the rights , safety and welfare of the Citizens . We have been told that if our arguments were accepted we could prevent necessary prison consturction. I am in favor of prison construction, but the concerns of the sheriff and the Community Corrections Board should always be addressed because they know their community and the safety needs of that community . The intent of the law-makers and the Governor surely was not Pre-Parole at the cost of citizens safety. And I ask what kind of facility will this be when a contractor has been selected that has at every turn tried to deny rights , intimidate and lie to the public about what they will have to live with. Maybe when there is as big a contract as this it attracts this element. There have been recommendations for denial of the facility from the Adams County Planning Commission, the Adams County Board of Commissioners , the Brighton City Council and the Commerce City Planning Commission and we don' t know what happened in Denver, Aurora and the other site in Commerce City. Add to that the large number of Commerce City residence that intend to vote the facility down. I think that says NO! ! ! ! I would like to thank you for letting us speak to you and I hope that what we have said will shed some light on the problems with this project. 9;21249. � ICii i (_ ) � ar _� f . 1 � i�l _°'. LI"L�_ i 1 PREPAROLE FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS 2 17-2-401. Definitions. As used in this part 4, unless 3 the context otherwise requires: 4 (1) "Inmate", for the purposes of placing such inmate 5 within a preparole program, means a person sentenced to the 6 department of corrections and who, for the purpose of 7 determining such inmate' s limitations of confinement, is 8 eligible for classification under community, minimum, or 9 medium security by the classification system officially 10 adopted by the department of corrections. • 11 (2) "Preparole facility or program" means a secure • 12 facility or program which: 13 (a) Is operated by a contractual agreement between the 14 department and a unit of local government, a private nonprofit 15 agency or organization, or any corporation, association, or 16 labor organization; • 17 (b) Provides secure residential beds to any inmate who / 18 is tilt...tin ninety days of the date upon which it is anticipated 19 that he will be paroled ' and is rejected by a community 20 corrections board or program, regressed from a community �r 21 corrections program, or ineligible for a community corrections 22 program and who is under the care and custody of the 23 department; and 24 (c) Provides in-residence programs and services to 25 instruct such inmates in obtaining and holding regular 26 employment, in the process of enrolling in and maintaining 27 academic courses and vocational training programs, in -2- 9u1w419 r7,6 7C-/L6 /IV/ LONG-TERM SUBCOMMITTEE VEETING Page 2 current sentencing practices and an entire list of Colorado's criminal code would also be part of this process. Dr. Mande Indicated that the gathering of data would not be done Incrementally, but concurrently, primarily to do impact analysis. Ranking of offense seriousness would come after looking at Colorado's criminal code and beer: ;n' down the crimes into categories. Minnesota did that by breaking the crimes down Into property crimes, violent crimes, personal crimes, crimes against order, and other crimes such as drug crimes, etc. Then they ranked those groups. After they created a whole new list, they divided that list into new categories and then put all the crimes back together to see II there was some agreement about class structure, or if It should be modified. When that process is complete you need to look at how to measure criminal history. a • I There followed a discussion of what constitutes a violent crime In Colorado. Dr. Mande pointed out that if the legislature defines a crime as a "crimp of violence," it's classified as r violent. Everything else is considered nonviolent. After offense ranking, criminal history and the decisions related to that, the commission would go through setting the INout decision. Who of this group is going to go to prison. What combination of offense and criminal history are we going to recommend for prison, corn; _. ity corrections, ISP or probation, or other dispositions. The next thing to be done would be to set '.-ie length of prison sentences. There would be a range, but a narrower range. It would be po aible to depart from that range and that would require establishment of departure policy. Discussion about departure policy included the question of whether judges could depart as long as they wrote an opinion and gave reasons why. Dr. Mande said that in Minnesota a Judge could only depart If they met certain statutory criteria, and that it was plways subject to appellate review. Dr. Mande Indicated that the purpose of sentencing guidelines is to gear the sentencing practices to the resources available to the state, and to implement those sentencing practices. The risk management Issue was then discussed. Dr. Mande described risk management as a combination of lust deserts" and incapacitation for a specific length of time. It's based-on the recognition that we don't know If rehabilitate offenders or not A way to control risk is to adding the needs of hlgh•rate often era, o pro ttte�henf OGit it treatment It-takes account tpqjou pan n e o e am • or a offense • a . Rep. Berry read from a letter from the former director of the Sentencing Guidelines Commission for the state of Washington, who described structured sentencing and how It was handled there. In Washington, the Sentencing Guidelines Commission was not given the task to resolve 9f 12'19 y JNTFRIM fOMMITTFF ON M i le/L J c bille. N: , ifCy 1M Dad .0 tillrc October• 3, 1989 ,p �� ^Ve�r_s��'/ c, Senator Schroe L-.e " - percent drug and alcohol treatme I L tn q the 73 percent recidivism rate. 1 U fitment programs or mandatory parti- ,Ct) ° rlier stage in incarceration. M red treatment earlier in the prc s is a problem. In addition, theri the recidivism rate and drug usa' Senator Hopp n who has been through treatment ;urroundings and his old habits i mandatory AA programs. Mr. d may make AA participation ma Representative Pankey expit.___ about treatment programs and said he preferred to concentra,, on education and awareness programs along with deterrents to drug use in the form of criminal sanctions. 10:06 a.m. -- Drugs and Crime -- Division of Criminal Justice Kim English, Division of Criminal Justice (DCJ) , presented various facts on drugs and crime (Attachment B) . Ms. English pointed out the following: -- as individual drug use increases, individual crime increases. However, there may not be an impact on the overall crime rate; -- criminal abusers of illegal substances usually have other adjustment problems with family, education, employment, and in other areas. The effects get tangled with the causes. The causes need to be addressed rather than just the effect of substance_abuse�_and_ -- - - -- ' treatment helps if a person remains in treatment. It is N. / possible that treatment may be successful if the term / success is redefined and levels of success are defined. For instance, a person who is in treatment and is not abusing drugs while he is_ treatment may be defined as a success rather than defining a person who is-'cured" forever of abuse and criminal activity as a success. In addition, Ms. English presented facts on the following topics: individual research strategies to determine the connection between drugs and crime (Attachment C) ; profile of at-risk juveniles (Attachment D) ; measurement of crime rates related to the increase in drug use (Attachment E); self-report of drug usage by inmates (Attachment F) ; and needs of CIRTs (Attachment G). Ms. English announced that the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) will start including Denver in its Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) -2- 9'11249 _J ( MEMORANDUM) May 25, 1990 TO: Interested Persons FROM: Legislative Council Staff SUBJEC"f: Summary of the Provisions of H.B. 1327 — A Plan To Address Problems Related to the Criminal Justice System This memorandum provides a summary of the provisions of H.B. 1327 adopted by the General Assembly during the 1990 legislative session. H.B. 1327,in its final form, is comprised of several bills: • H.B. 1327, introduced by Representative Neale, which addressed prison overcrowding by authorizing the construction of four corrections facilities; • S.B. 168, developed by the Criminal Justice Commission, revising earned time credits for inmates and eliminating good time credits; • S.B. 169, developed by the Criminal Justice Commission, containing several amendments to the statutes which provide greater discretion in sentencing, thereby making certain inmates eligible for parole, probation, or community-based detention and in turn making current prison beds available;• • S.B. 23, introduced by Senator Hopper, providing for monitoring of control- led substances in inmates, parolees, and probationers; and • S.B. 188, developed by the Capital Development Committee, recommend- ing four sites for construction of facilities. House Bill 1327 appropriates a total of $80,030,431 and 643 FTE for the im- plementation of its provisions. An additional S26 million bonding package from lottery funds is authorized for the construction of facilities. The potential bed gain is estimated at 498 beds in FY 1990-91 as a result of its provisions. The potential cost avoidance as a result of the provisions of the bill is estimated at up to $113 million in construction costs and up to $19.1 million in annual operating costs. The bill's soft bed solutions address "immediate" prison needs through FY 91-92, though most of the provisions will have an ongoing effect. The General Assembly will need to further address the issues of additional facilities and "sentencing reform" in order to meet future prison population demands. , _ 9c1249 sister MEMORAnDU To Board of Commissioners Data December 6, 1993 COLORADO From Clerk to the Board/Lin Dodge, Deputy//x1 Subject: Telephone Call re The Villa %% Telephone call December 6, 1993, 4:07 p.m. , from Mary Morgan, 10910 Turner Blvd. , #206, Longmont, CO, 776-6835, who wished to voice her opposition to the proposed pre-parole facility to be located near DelCamino by The Villa. LC-. ))),I7/71 GGC.GG 331:413 December 6 , 1993 Weld County Board of Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Commissioners : This letter is to urge your approval of the Del Camino Minimum Security Pre-Release Facility. Opposition to this facility seems to be a fear of the inmates who might escape and feeling that it would detract from overall quality of life of the neighborhood, neither of which has foundation in fact . I resided in Canon City from 1955 to 1977. When we moved to Canon City our children were in elementary school . They each completed high school in Canon City. At that time , the entire prison facility was at "Old Max" at the west edge of the city. Even then, no one seemed to have any fear of living in such close proximity of the prison. Later the Department of Corrections decided to build a medium security facility. There was strong talk of locating the new facility in the Denver area. The entire community joined with our representatives in the State Legislature to promote locating the new facility in the Canon City area. It was eventually located just east of Canon City. Incidentally, those State Legislators , Representative Bob Shoemaker and Senator Harold McCormick, were re-elected to several more terms . Part of the new medium security complex was a pre-parole center , located outside the fences . This consisted of classrooms and dormitory rooms without locks . This was a new and radical approach to aid in rehabilitation rather than just incarceration. Many people in southern Colorado were asked to aid in conducting classes aimed at preparing inmates for life outside the walls . I taught a class on "How to Find a Job and Keep It" for about three years . It was an approach that proved to be very successful . I hope all this illustrates that , contrary to reports given to the Greeley City Council , Canon City, a community with years of experience , would feel that a minimum security facility would be a real asset to a community. A clean industry with a staff that will be above average in income , education and those qualities that make for a good community. Mxhihi MNIMMM cc /'_ . rc�_ 931249 I urge you to make your decision based on the potential assets of the facility and not on emotional "what ifs" . We never, in 20 years , were worried or concerned about living in close proximity to a prison. Sincerely, Burl Huitt Retired Vice President Greeley Gas Company 901249 • TO: THE WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: GENE BRANI'NER, . Please accept this letter as my support for the pre-parole facility in Del Camino. I believe it is a much need program for our justice system. I also think that the developing of such a facility in Weld County will be economically advantageous, as it will create new jobs. The tax revenues and additional employment that will be created as a result of the development of this facility is why I would strongly encourage each of you to vote in favor of this proposal. Arabs • • DEC 7 ' 93 9: 22 303 353 8814 PRGE . 001 �2�/VNI�N �c . /7; X3.249 r. tl I 1 n ( (� (1 /i , �iJQ,e-ea 01)- ZQ,vrX t� CICLWIl✓\t o Qa C e rS Q D. "Ice �J G r , (IC 'O l0 3Z J (Lyn p �e9 �v� _Q �C P-r" Pr �.¢i(r v tc efE4^-, uv\ -c re-rC u-Ir�c... ',:: wwvw� wA T6} e-(�fQat-n.4_s.lJ -4a-t-W41.41. I o p rL pa-auZ 4:r As Q r e-4-i atwo'- c I p e 0-4"-69cL p.2444^-e-r e�Q Ltc-�- s pa a u �; J e� a (�.�.p�.,"Mti.- c�(La..�t ` I p- 't�w��-A.cv c_b cjk- ref;eao \v--'1.. ivJ.j cat_ s iV .- Gk-✓t_ Cs C9-v-c e e cQ zY i016.-0. -to az/P-e z,,-Lc oQ nit 'ywLa i , ,a wig x ,lam a-4.,,,,,,:„ t 921249 f7c/12/7";,-/- (7000 c c . "2 C+ac� . r -. . Weld • ?Unty ..:'.t_ L:_ .• J S 8 AtI:e'n.: :.l''I : Well .7.ia: t:y ':`t`•:: :':r'i . our STRONG ,:.. ._i - ;t i1O the o: ar%- ni ny hut:: . qua i i t v .•l _....f t• _.;id safety in our ne. Willi:st'x•hc c.d •tre p.rin iT?t. The :t-'ri•.'F.'•i:. f ' . 1 W :::igril.fi .':.1rtt dt'w,r•a':l:••t: ic',-i ''Y1 the _'mmuri :t:y •:itlaii ' 'y we have ch, :: n t•:'L out . I:icreci".ecE 1;.j-) .': l.11'1:. t. _ crime due the, •t,,t actt:l' the I s trequx.. nt.ing _'.12' communs.t through l n ': l.''_' ro is_l•.'n and `:`1 ?t'.c l .i.•'t"! 4 regat. i•v'::. . Z t ti c t .. .E�1,,-:p or._y vat 1.e3 * incre.::tse In property r_y taXe., due id•:led need for tile `. •t.t'•.. • 1•:);: an.A( l :..r entorcemh •t'si. will bfr the area '.E2':.tg:_ 1 1: Ll1:... _!1.3 Thy' result j change in the '`'••:;tplexi ti of our coftliYti:i•1it-'y that 1:. 1:. t .t'" . .'E' .,'ii:'ie. Th•.- es 4eIIL€• C•I rural living i.; -! +..r'ust ..n n.:-. Il .ig.ti:''_'i•': . an unspoken community tru:.,t., t-l":.�1t will t'F.• :iest1"oye'.! with the intrc'dluLt..ion of such a facility. PLEASE VOTE NO at tt•ic' review •''f a;.'p I icr ti':..n �l1 W€-'irlesu:ty. i!ecc''Gil)E:•T• a th. Respectfully , r(1.//tAlite(4974-( ' zfle-:.e-t- George _oburr, Carol Coburn 138E:3 We'id _.aunty t.d Longmont . i'C' 80504 - 9646 931249 &x.hihi f f'f2P°P F �-�n« 4st mEmoRAnDum To Board Dam December 7, 1993 COLORADO From Clerk to the Board Subject: Telephone calls - The Villa On December 7, 1993, at 9:10 a.m. , Judy Docheff, 1441 Weld County Road 28, Longmont, telephoned to state her opposition to The Villa's pre-parole facility near Del Camino. On December 7, 1993, at 9: 15 a.m. , Jackie Docheff, 13388 Weld County Road 1, Longmont, telephoned to state her opposition to The Villa' s pre-parole facility near Del Camino. skm 931249 `7!CJ! /- ,�)- CC : /L; 4/rC December 3, 1993 Weld County Board of County Commissioners P. 0. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Sir/Madam: We are writing in opposition to the proposed site of the Villa pre-parole facility. We are not opposed to the facility, just the location. The real estate along the I-25 corridor would be better utilized by retail outlets or other clean industry which would produce paychecks. The Del Camino area is going to grow and we should be very selective in forming a base for development that will enhance growth, not impede it. Contrary to the Villa's statements that penal institutions enhance property values, they detract. I cannot visualize retail or wholesale enterprises wanting to build near a prison. The real estate in the Del Camino area is too valuable to be used for a prison facility. A prison should not be in a heavily populated or high profile area. My other concern is the Villa's plans for the remainder of the land. We feel this facility, as presented, is just a seed for further expansion. We are also concerned about drawing an undesirable element to the area. Is the Weld County Sheriff's Office going to man their southern sub-station on a 24-hour basis? There are many homes and businesses in close proximity to the proposed facility which would be vulnerable to robbery or other crimes from the inmates (should they escape) or from undesirable visitors to the facility. Since the facility would be on a major interstate and within a half mile of a heavy traffic area, there would be easy access to transportation should anyone try to escape. It seems there should be a better place to locate such a facility in a remote, sparsely populated area. We encourage you to give serious consideration to the adverse impact this facility would make on this community. Si erely, Q Q-l-it$f Larry & Barbara Abbott 5825 Weld County Road 22 Longmont, CO 80504 /*hit/ 1' kk : to ; /IAec 931249 REES & COMPANY P. O. Box 1764 • ENGLEWOOD. CO 80150.1764 • (303) 762-1254 December 3, 1993 Weld County Commissioners County Courthouse 915 10th St. Greeley, Co. 80631 Re: Pre Parole Facility Dear Commissioners; In a few days you will have a difficult decession to make. As a land owner in the I- 25 & Colo. 66 area, I would like to go on record as being in favor of the Facility. The Facility will bring jobs to area. The economy will benefit. St Vrain Sanitation District will get a much needed shot in the aim. Since the Facility is privately owned, there will be tax revenues. It is my understanding that the building will not look like a prison. I do not believe that allowing this Facility will deter development in the area at all. In my opinion the pluses out weigh the negatives. Sincerely, Jim Rees General Partner 25-66, Ltd. rXhl/' Sj SS Commercial, Industrial & Investment Real Estate �� . w�; X931249 . 1(//k., EORRflDUfertPt To Board Data December 7, 1993 COLORADO From Clerk to the Board st,b,.ct: Telephone call - The Villa On December 7, 1993, at 1: 10 p.m. , Sandra Sawdy, Mead, telephoned to state her opposition to the pre-parole facility near Del Camino. -/</)/bit- rrTrr « / "oe, ,& 331249 �t�t TO1I L pf 1 • 32 *4: �6� z-azz6zuL cc : ��;,fie« 931249 -LM 4 321 40:12 THE SIGN SHALL BE POSTED ADJACENT TO AND VISIBLE FROM A PUBLICLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF- WAY. IN THE EVENT THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION IS NOT ADJACENT TO A PUBLICLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE APPLICANT SHALL POST ONE SIGN IN THE MOST PROMINENT PLACE ON THE PROPERTY AND POST A SECOND SIGN AT THE POINT AT WHICH THE DRIVEWAY (ACCESS DRIVE) INTERSECTS A PUBLICLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION": SIGN POSTING CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER THE PENALTIES OF PERJURY THAT THE SIGN PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES VAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY Y+AT T.RAST L0 DAYS J BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HEARING FOR CASE ¢ -344$ THE SIGN WAS POSTED BY: r-, NAME OF PERSON POSTING SIGN • • TURF. OF AP C T • STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF WELD ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO HE THIS / DAY OF /C 1711`' SEAL NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES r'1Y ` ,r �i �� LAST DAY TO POST SIGN IS: 4✓E.'deI ,R8 , 19 73 PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES' OFFICE ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF THE HEARING. ** Tf1TRL PRGE.002 ** Cam;��f - LtL/C.LL« C;C: f �e. rk*Cci 931249 Concerned Citizens of Southwest Weld County Witnesses: December 8. 1993 NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1. Leroy Clark 3823 Findlay Lane 772-3018 Longmont, CO 80503 2. Dennis Tomline Specialty Products Co. 772-2103 4045 Specialty Place Longmont, CO 80502 3. Kathy Neiley 5416 Weld County Road 535-0334 #36 Platteville, CO 80516 4. Conrad Hopp 11413 Weld County Road 776-7347 #13 Longmont, CO 80504 5. Diane Aites 4919 Weld County Road 772-6585 24 3/4 Longmont, CO 80504 6. Jan England 4879 Weld County Road 776-9189 24 3/4 Longmont, CO 80504 7. Frank Canapa 11621 Weld County Road 651-0584 #13 Longmont, CO 80504 GED\51615\77275.1 hih V Y VV Y ee : FL, ,d0ec_ 5i 931249 _idv Pnmrrr C gxntrulih( .fW— i �a -IMEarar- -an —rrr —rrr —War Urrr GREELEY/WELD _` December 8, 1993 Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley,CO 80632 Dear Commissioners, At the November 18, 1992, Board of Directors meeting of the Greeley/Weld Economic Development Action Partnership, the Board unanimously approved a position in favor of The Villa project. The subject project meets EDAP's criteria for economic development projects, including minimal impact on the quality of life of the community, quality jobs, and increased tax base. Enclosed for your information are the following two documents: 1. "A Private Preparole Prison in the Local Economy," September 7, 1992 2. "Addendum to a Private Preparole Prison in the Local Economy," March 14, 1993 Both of the above research documents were prepared by Ann Garrison of the Economics Department at UNC, and funded by Greeley/Weld EDAP, Inc. and the UNC Research Corporation. We are looking forward to working with you in making this project a reality. Sincerely, William J. Argo, CID President WJA:ljs Enclosures GRLLI LY.'W LID F(ONOMI( DR LIONMINI I' () Ro�5 R 10gill yIreot Grr^r i I( (, olado 806 i≥ 9312 9 Sr); 35 4,05 Iaa ini -?Iii' ('C: 1t; �j 'LJC:(5�(L WI�Y 2�1/A.19_L• L_ F h.&r+ WWWWW 1 U_ A PRIVATE PREPAROLE PRISON IN THE LOCAL ECONOMY Prepared by Ann J. Garrison Economics Department College of Arts and Sciences University of Northern Colorado RESEARCH ON LOCAL ECONOMY FUNDED BY EDAP AND UNC RESEARCH CORPORATION September 7 , 1992 931249 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 . In 1987 state prisons in the United States were operating at 105 to 120 percent of capacity. In 1990 Colorado's state prisons were operating at 115 percent of capacity. 2 . Between 1971 and 1985 the Consumer Price Index for the county rose 165 . 68 percent. During the same time operating costs of our correctional institutions rose 470 percent. 3. 1990 Colorado data NAT I O N A L NUMBER RANKING Crime total 199 ,434 23 Crime rate per 100, 000 people 6, 053 .7 12 Number of adults under the state correctional system 39, 610 27 State prison population 7, 018 28 State and local government spending on the police protection $370, 581, 000 18 Per capita state and local government spending on the correctional system $112 .49 9 State and local government employment in corrections 5, 431 25 4 . In 1991 the crime total in Colorado had risen to 204,531. 5 . Colorado' s decentralized tax system, excessive burden of local tax systems, reductions in Federal Government financial aid, and threats from groups that want to limit state and local governments ' ability to generate new tax dollars adds to the bottlenecks in the supply of correction facilities and other public goods . 6 . In 1991 there were private correctional institutions that a capacity to house 15, 476 people, and by the spring of 1992 the capacity had increased to 19 , 513 . There were 60 facilities under contract in early 1992 . 7 . The average savings realized from private prisons depends on whether private enterprise takes over an existing prison, designs and operates a prison, or designs, builds and operates the prison. If the private firm takes over an existing prison, the saving average 10 percent. If the prison is designed and operated by private enterprise, the savings are 15 percent. When the prison is designed, built, and operated with the private sector, the savings average 20 percent. 8 . The normal cost of building a public prison is $82, 000 a bed; the preparole prison would have a construction cost of $14, 000 a bed. With capital construction costs included the 931219 daily average prisoner cost in public prisons is $65 a day. The cost in the prerelease prison would be between $44 and $48 . 9 . The prerelease prison would provide 6 hours of holistic education each day. This education would provide information and skills to access resources in the communities where the prisoners will live when they are released. The education will also make it easier to access employment. 10 . The $4 . 8 million in construction, the 100 employees with an annual payroll of $1 . 4 million, and the $4 . 818 million in fees received by the establishment would change the employment, output (gross sales ) , value added, and income in Weld County. These increases are given below. TABLE III POSITIVE ECONOMIC IMPACT IMPACT OF IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION OPERATION EMPLOYMENT 101 JOBS 138 JOBS OUTPUT $6 . 22 MILLION $9 . 34 MILLION VALUE ADDED 6 . 84 MILLION 6 .41 MILLION INCOME 6 .71 MILLION 6 . 24 MILLION 931219 A PRIVATE PREPAROLE PRISON IN THE LOCAL ECONOMY INTRODUCTION Every transaction in our economy involves economic forces from both the supply and demand side of the market. In the past it was believed that the government was best at supplying those goods and services that affected as jointly and equally and that the private sector should provide the rest of the goods and services. Prisons, like defense, were something that affected us jointly and equally. As a result we expected the government to supply prisons and jails. We looked at prisons' functions to include custody, coercion, and correction of prisoners who were classified as needing maximum security prisons or customary security. As long as the prisoners were incarcerated, the prisons/jails prevented crime outside the prisons. They have not deterred other people from committing crime, and they have not reformed the inmates or prevented them from further crimes when they were freed. Economic conditions have changed. These changes require us to ask a question. How can we use our limited resources in a more efficient manner so that the correctional system can meet the demands placed on it? The answer that emerged is a multiform system that allows flexibility and ends the government's monopoly. It would house and treat prisoners in both the old and new way. Charles Logan in his book, Private Prisons: Cons and Pros, summarizes the problem and the solution. "Faced with overflowing and aging facilities, with court orders demanding immediate reforms, with already straining budgets and voter rejections of prison construction bond issues, and with mandatory sentence laws, toughening public attitudes, and "wars on drugs" that promise even larger prison populations, government authorities are ready to consider many different options to help relieve the strain. Some of the options include: emergency early release provisions; policies of selective incarceration and release; community corrections; home confinement with electronic monitoring; intensive supervision probation; increased use of fines and contracting with other jurisdictions for jail and prison space. All of these options are aimed at either decreasing the prison population or using existing prison capacity more efficiently. Another option is to contract with the private sector to finance construct, own, and operate prisons and jails. This option does not conflict with any of the above options; rather, it supplements them" (Charles H. Logan, 1990) . ECONOMIC FACTORS AFFECTING THE SUPPLY AND DEMAND OF PRISONS Between 1978 and 1986 in the United States there was a 68 percent increase in the daily average of people in prisons and jails. By 921249 1986 it was the norm for state prisons to have 6 percent more prisoners than space for prisoners (Douglas C. McDonald, 1990) . In 1987 state prisons were operating at 105 to 120 percent of capacity (Charles H. Logan, 1990) . Between 1971 and 1985 the nation's Consumer Price Index went up 165. 68 percent. During the same time operating costs of our correctional institutions rose 470 percent (Douglas C. McDonald, 1990) . In addition to rapidly rising operating costs, our nation faced the need for more prisons and less ability to fund them. The Federal Government 's Fiscal Year 1992 Unified Budget shows that $17 billion was appropriated for law enforcement. This amount would understate the amount of Federal Government funds going into law enforcement and correctional institutions. It does not include the funds transferred to lower levels of government for their use or "off-budget" items that would be in this particular area. The Federal Government 's transfer of funds to lower government is decreasing at the time when the operating costs of correctional facilities are rising faster than the general price level, and it is becoming harder for state and local governments' income inelastic tax systems to generate the revenue needed for the competing uses of this revenue. CRIME AHD CORRECTIONS IN COLORADO Table I presents statistics dealing with crime and law enforcement in Colorado in 1990. The total crime in Colorado in 1990 was 199, 434, and the crime rate per 100, 000 people was 6, 053. 7. We ranked number 23 in the nation in the number of crimes and number 12 in rate of crime. There were 182, 106 property crimes. The state and local governments spent $370, 581, 000 on police protection in 1990. This amount of spending gave us a national ranking of 18. If the spending is per capita spending our rank was nine with $112. 49 spent per capita. The national average was 899. 09. There were 5, 431 people (FTE) employed by state and local government in corrections, and the state prisons were operating at 115 percent of capacity. There were 39, 610 adults under state corrections supervision, and 7, 018 state prisoners. TABLE I CRIME AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN COLORADO IN 1990 NUMBER IN PERCENT OF RANK IN THE COLORADO U. S. TOTAL NATION Total Crimes 199, 434 1. 387. 23 Crime Rate Per 100, 000 people 6,053. 7 NA 12 Violent Crimes 17, 328 0. 95 24 931219 TABLE I CONTINUED CRIME AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN COLORADO IN 1990 NUMBER IN PERCENT OF RANK IN THE COLORADO U. S. TOTAL NATION Murders 138 0. 59 30 Rapes 1, 521 1. 48 21 Robberies 2, 985 0. 47 28 Aggravated Assaults 12, 684 1. 20 22 Property Crimes 182, 106 1. 44 23 Burglaries 39, 822 1. 30 25 Larceny & Theft 128, 172 1. 61 22 Motor Vehicle Theft 14, 112 0. 86 25 Adults Under State Correctional Super- vision 39, 610 1. 01 27 State Prisoners 7, 018 0. 99 28 Prisoners in State Prisons as a Percent of Capacity 115% NA 18 Prisoners Under Sentence of Death 3 0. 13 31 Adults Under State Parole Supervision in 1989 1, 799 0. 41 32 Adults on State Probation in 1989 26, 378 1. 07 26 FTE State & Local Corrections Employment 5, 431 1. 08 25 State and Local Expenditures for Protection $370, 581, 000 1. 50 18 Per capita ex- penditures on State and Local Corrections $112. 49 NA 9 SOURCE: Morgan Quitno Corporation, State Rankino 1992; A Statistical View of the 50 United States, 1992. In 1991 in Colorado the following took place : One Index Crime Every 2. 6 minutes One Violent Crime Every 27. 9 minutes One Rape every 5 hours and 27 minutes One Robbery every 2 hours and 25 minutes One Aggravated Assault every 39 minutes One Property Crime every 2. 8 minutes One Burglary every 13. 4 minutes One Larceny-Theft every 4 minutes 931249 One Motor Vehicle Theft every 36. 5 minutes (Colorado Bureau of Investigation Crime Information Center, 1992) . There were notable increases in the number and rates of crime in Colorado in 1991. Table II shows the percent changes in the number and rates of crime in the state in 1991. The rate are per 100, 000 inhabitants. TABLE II PERCENT CHANGES IN INDEX CRIMES IN COLORADO 1990-1991 TYPE OF PERCENT CHANGES IN CRIME NUMBER RATE PER 100, 000 Criminal homicide 42. 8% 38. 1% Forcible rape 4. 7 2. 2 Robbery 21. 7 18. 8 Assault 6. 1 3. 5 Burglary -1. 5 -3. 9 Larceny-theft 3. 9 1. 3 Auto theft 2. 0 -0. 5 TOTAL 3. 1 0. 6 SOURCE:CRIME IN COLORADO .ANNUAL REPORT, Colorado Bureau of ' Investigation Crime Information Center, 1992. There were 204, 531 crimes reported in the state in 1991. There were 197 murders, 1, 589 rapes, 3, 630 robberies, and 13, 443 aggravated assaults. These crimes were crimes against people. Crimes against property included 39, 031 burglaries, 132, 264 larceny-thefts, and 14, 377 motor vehicle thefts. Larceny-thefts made up 64. 7 percent of the index crimes in Colorado in 1991. The 1991 numbers do not include manslaughter by negligence and simply assault (Colorado Bureau of Investigation Crime Information Center, 1992) . While the number of crimes in the nation and state rose briskly through last year, prison populations are expected to rise more rapidly from the turn of the century through the year 2020 (Douglas C. Mcdonald, 1990) . This projection is based on demographic changes only. Structural changes in the national economy and state economy will have an impact on the number of crimes and the rate of crime per 100, 000 people. These structural changes will increase the amount of crime. In 1980 one out of every 362 adults was in prison or jail, in 1991 one out of every 156 was, and in 2000 one out of every 99 931249 adults is expected to be incarcerated (Dennis Cauchon, 1992) . Colorado's revenue system cannot generate enough money to provide the public and merit goods that people expect. It is undesirable for the state to allocate a larger and larger portion of the tax revenue it has collected toward the correctional system, because of other increasing needs. In Fiscal Year 1991 Colorado was collecting $937 in per capita taxes. The amount of per capita income taxes was $432. 69, and this gave the state the national rank of 17. Only 16 other states had higher per capita personal income taxes. The per capita state corporate income tax revenue was $34. 75 with a national rank of 42. Per capita state sales taxes in the same year were $250. This amount gave us a national ranking of 40 (Morgan Quitno Corporation, 1992) . A better measure of the state's tax burden on the tax payer and a better measure of its tax effort is to look at state tax collections per $1, 000 per fiscal year. In Fiscal Year 1989, Colorado had a national ranking of 48 and collected $53. 43 of taxes per $1, 000. Personal income taxes collected per $1, 000 of personal income came to $23. 42, and our rank in the nation was 23. The state's general retail sales tax collections per 51, 000 of personal income was $13. 82. The state's rank was 44 (Colorado Public Expenditure Council, 1991 ) . These numbers show that the tax burden of Colorado's tax system is relatively light. This minimal burden is the result of the state decentralizing many of the functions that states frequently provide. The shifting of these functions on the local governments has increased the tax burden of local governments' tax system (local governments' tax systems are more inelastic and burdensome than the states' ) . Our local governments' tax systems collected $55. 85 per $1, 000 of personal income in Fiscal Year 1989. Only four other states had local tax systems that were collecting more out of $1, 000 of personal income (Colorado Public Expenditure Council, 1991 ) . The decentralized tax system, excessive burden of local tax systems, and threats from groups that want to limit governments' ability to generate new tax dollars adds to the bottlenecks in the supply of correctional facilities, as well as other needed public goods. Privatization will be part of the future. Contrary to the conventional wisdom that most people share, the average person is not wanting to "lock 'em all up and throw away the key" as the generic solution to the crime problem. When people who have been surveyed have not been provided sufficient information about the offender, they suggested tough sentencing • recommendations. When additional information was provided, the people had different recommendations. What was considered to be a soft sentence was a sentence to straight probation. The respondents that were generally in favor of tough sentencing were 931249 the ones that had reported sometime of household victimization within the past 12 months (Mary J. Mande, Ph. D. and Kim English, M. A. , 1989) . PRIVATE PRISONS There are specific benefits that are provided by private prisons. Charles Logan in Private Prisons lists nine different factors that are generally considered. Paraphrasing of his part of his text follows: "Propriety : private prisons are more responsive to changes in demand; contractual wardens are more interested to govern inmates fairly to lower costs and help get the contract renewed; the government regulation of these prisons adds an ,independent review of the correctional decisions and actions, which improves due process; since private and public wardens are subject to the same constitutional laws, protecting due process. Costs: the prisons are built and operated more efficiently and at less cost; contracting fees are typically indexed to the Consumer Price Index, which prevents the hyperinflating of costs we now have; true costs can be determined, compared and adjusted. Quality : contracting promotes creativity ; by providing something that public prisons can be compared to will increase the quality in these prisons. Quantity : private prisons help to limit the size of government; build prisons faster than the government can; responds more quickly to changes in needs. Flexibility : contracting allows more flexibility in terms of expansion, contraction, and termination; reduces slow decision making by entrenched bureaucrats; allows efficient personnel management. Security : increased staff training and professionalism may enhance public safety; fewer strikes and labor disputes. Liability : higher quality performance and through insurance, indemnification. Accountability : market mechanisms added to those of the political process increase accountability; the visibility of private prisons makes them more accountable than the historically ignored (until recently ) public prisons; contracting broadens the interest, involvement and participation in corrections by people in the private sector. 931249 Corruption: managers have a vested interest in the reputation and financial success of the institute. Dependence: private prisons increase the number of suppliers within the private sector; they are less vulnerable to the impact of strikes, slowdowns, and bad management in the firms that supply them with needed supplies" (Charles H. Logan, 1990) . The current incremental approach to privatization of prisons began in the 1980s after entrepreneurs became able to access the capital market, public correctional personnel with experience were willing to move into the private prison business, enabling laws were passed, and governments were willing to privatize prisons (Charles W. Thomas, and Charles H. t,ogan, 1991 ) . They also could not afford to continue trying to do business as they had in the past. The average savings realized from private prisons depends on whether private enterprise takes over an existing prison, designs and operates a prison, or designs, builds and operates the prison. If the private firm takes over an existing prison, the savings average 10 percent. If the prison is designed and operated by private enterprise, the savings are 15 percent. When the prison is designed, built, and operated within the private sector, the savings average 20 percent (Dennis Cauchon, 1992) . California is a prime example of a state that tried to build enough prisons to house the exploding prison population and lessen crime. Neither result occurred. Even though the state spent 56. 2 billion during the 1980s, they were operating at 175 percent of capacity in 1989. About 80 percent of the released prison population returned through the prisons' revolving doors. A large percent of the people returned (47 percent, or 39, 976 people) in 1989 had not been convicted of new crimes but had violated their parole conditions. One of the reasons for the high recidivism was the small percent of prisoners who went through a pre-release program. In 1988 around 4 percent of the men in prison were involved in a pre-release program (Anthony Costell, Rick Garnett and Vincent Shiraldi, 1991 ) . During the last few years there have been some trends established. One of these trends is that private prisons appear to be filling a niche when they serve special population needs. Examples of groups with special needs includes pre-release facilities, return-to-custody facilities and female only prisons. This trend surfaced because states considered it to be to the states' advantage to turn over prisons to private enterprise for these groups rather than the general prison population. California, Texas, Kentucky, and New Mexico were the first states to privatize prisons for these populations (Alexis M. Durham III, Ph. D. 1991 ) . 931249 In 1991 there were private correctional institutions that had a capacity to house 15, 476 people and did house 13, 348 people. In the spring of 1992, the capacity had increased to 19, 513 and the prisoners living in these facilities numbered 17, 317. There were 60 facilities under contract early in 1992 (Charles W. Thomas and Suzanna L. Foard, 1992) . In 1992 the International Association of Residential and Community Alternatives issued a policy statement dealing with incarcerated people. This statement places a heavy emphasis on putting in place programs that are directly related to criminal activity. These conditions would include drug addition, unemployment, homelessness, poverty, and illiteracy ( International Association of Residential and Community Alternatives, 1992) . The customary, ordinary manner of dealing with incarcerated prisoners provided an unusual vocational education (they learned how to be more efficient, productive criminals) to the prisoners and left their "old personal baggage" in place when they were released. Albert Einstein once said, "The world is a product of our thinking. " If we do not like the product of correctional system, we need to change our way of thinking. "The very difficult set of social policy issues raised by the privatization debate ought to be resolved by moving in whichever direction has a reasonable likelihood of yielding the more efficient and effective means of improving the quality of correctional services. Moving in such a direction carries with it the promise of better protecting the rights of confined persons in the immediate future and the broader public interest in the longer term. To favor traditional means of providing correctional services merely as a consequence of habit or from a preference for symbolic representations of the power of the State is just as absurd as to favor privatization merely because of some abstract value one might impute to profit motives. The option to be favored is the option that proves its ability to get done the job at hand. That option is not necessarily the option which wear a department of corrections badge on its state-issued shirt" (Charles W. Thomas and Linda S. Calvert Hanson, 1989) . A PRIVATE PRERELEASE PRISON IN THE GREELEY/WELD COUNTY ECONOMIES The proposed private prerelease prison would house prisoners for a 90-day period before their release. The minimum security prisoners would be in the part of their sentences when the threat of escape is the smallest. An escape attempt or escape would result in the prisoner's return to prison. The additional costs to the prisoner would outweigh any anticipated additional benefits of an escape. The fenced facility would have 400 beds and would average around an average daily population of 300. The prisoners would receive six hours of education each day. The number of hours exceeds the number of hours in "regular prison education" by 5. 5 hours. This education would be holistic in nature. It would include 36 hours 931219 of education in the area of employment, 30 hours dealing with family relations, 20 hours of money management, 30 hours of education dealing with anger and stress, and 36 hours dealing with community resources. The purpose of the hours of education is to provide them with links in the towns where they will go and the resources in these towns ( John Coppom, 1992) . This type of education is a step toward their being able to integrate themselves into the general population. The economic impact of the facility would be in felt through the construction, operation, and maintenance of the facility. The impact of the construction would be short run, while the economic impact of the operation and maintenance of the facility would be long run. The construction costs would be a minimum of $4. 8 million, S1 million a year would be spent cal operation of the facility, and maintenance down the road would be 820, 000 a year. The facility would hire a minimum of 100 full-time workers, and the annual payroll would be $1. 4 million. These workers would receive an attractive fringe-benefit package that compares most favorably to packages provided in the private sector. The pay would average annual monetary pay would vary from $12, 000 up to $60, 000. The annual payroll would be S1. 4 million. Wages plus fringe benefits equals the value of total compensation workers are paid. At the end of March, benefits in private industry were 32. 3 percent of the total compensation given blue- collar workers, 26. 6 percent for white-collar jobs, and 24. 3 percent for service occupations (United States Department of Labor, 1992) . The workers' total compensation would be positively affected by the value of the fringe benefits. The short and long run effects on the local economy would include higher employment, output, value added, and personal income. The numbers that follow are derived from the most recent IMPLAM input-output table for Weld County. There is no input-output table for Greeley or other urbanized areas. . This table divides the county 's economy into over 500 industries and can be used to show a variety of factors related to the supply and demand of these industries' products. Construction activity would generate 72 jobs in the construction industry, 20 jobs in industries that supply the construction industry, and 9 jobs because of additions to the population. The population expands in counties with increased economic activity, regardless of the source of the activity. If the contractors are local, the 72 jobs would be within the county. If the contractors are from out of the county, some of the 72 workers will be from Weld County and some from other counties. Most of the 20 jobs in industries that supply the firms involved in the construction will be within the county. The 72 jobs created, as well as the 20 jobs, would not be permanent unless the economy 's expansion continued. 9412'19 The output, or gross sales, in Weld County would rise $6. 22 million as a result of the direct, indirect, and induced impacts of the building project. The direct effect is the impact on the particular industry being considered, the indirect effect takes into account the impact on all of the suppliers of the industry, and the induced impact adds the changes that would occur because of a population change. Value added is the different between the costs that a firm has in purchasing its inputs used in its business and the revenue that it gets when its output is sold. The construction of the prison would add 86. 84 million in value added from the direct, indirect, and induced effects of the project. The increase in value added exceeds the increase in gross sales because the building, once completed, is used rather than sold. When the direct, indirect, and induced effects of the construction project are included, the income in Weld County would go up $6. 71 million. The operation of the preparole prison would also change employment, output, value added, and income. These changes would be long run, not short run. Employment at the prison would increase the county 's employment by a minimum of 100. Businesses that supply the prison would increase their employees by nine, and the population would grow by 29. The total change in employment would be a minimum of 138. Gross sales would rise in Weld County by $9. 34 million, and value added would go up by 56. 41 million. Both of these changes include the effects of the workers spending their pay, the prison buying supplies from a variety of firms, and the increased population spending. At the same time the income of the people of the county would rise $6. 24 million dollar. The business would receive a minimum of S4. 818 million in fees for its services. As the fees that the prison receives in payment for the prisoners rises, the economic impact on employment, output, value added, and income would rise. The industry is not a boom-bust industry, but rather an industry that is quite stable. As a result of its stability, the economic impact of it on Greeley and Weld County will be stable too. The numbers given for the change in employment, output, value added, and income would be larger, if there are smaller leaks out of the spending stream than are included in the input-output table. Or, the total impact would be smaller if the leaks are larger in the economy than built into the table. People in Greeley and Weld County, as taxpayers in the state, would also not be funding additional prison space or the operation of prison space at as high a cost as found with public prisons. The normal cost of building a public prison is S82, 000 931249 a bed; the preparole prison would have a consturction cost of $14, 000 a bed. A new public prison requires $40 to $50 million for construction. When capital construction costs are included in the daily average prisoner cost, the public prisons cost $65 a day. The cost in this prison would be $44 to $48 (John Coppom, 1992) . The psychic costs of the prison include the fear of prisoners escaping. At Canon City's preparole facility, there is no fence and there have been five prisoners who have walked away since 1987. The Villa in Greeley has housed more than 1, 800 people in 3. 5 years with ten walk aways ( John Coppom, 1992) . The Villa has no fence, but the preparole prison would. Good management, minimum security prisoners, and prisoners with a lot to lose with an escape lowers the probability of escape and the psychic costs that might be present. 9;31219 BIBLIOGRAPHY Coppom, John, Interview; September 3, 1992, Greeley, Colorado. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Significant Features of Fiscal Federalism, Vol 1 , February, 1992; Washington, D.C. Costillo, Anthony, Garnett, Rick, and Shiraldi, Vincent, "Parole Violators in California: A Waste of Money, A Waste of Time; " The International Association of Residential and Community Alternatives, Vol. V, No. 1; March/April, 1992 . Colorado Public Expenditure Council, How Colorado Compares - State and Local Taxes, 1991 Edition, Denver, Co. ; 1991 . Department of Public Safety, Colorado Bureau of Investigation Crime Information Center, 1991 Crime in Colorado, Denver, Co. ; 1992 . Hanson, Linda, "The Privatization of Corrections Movement: A Decade of Change; "Journal of Contemporary Justice; March, 1991 . Hawkins, Gordon, The Prison Policy and Practice, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Il. ; 1976 . The International Association of Residential and Community Alternatives, "Social Policy on Mass Imprisonment, " International Association of Residential and Community Alternatives Journal, Vol. V, No. 1; March/April, 1992 . Kiplinger Washington Letter, Washington, D.C. ; August 28, 1992 . Logan, Charles H. , Private Prisons : Cons and Pros , Oxford University Press, New York, N.Y. ; 1990. Mande, Mary J. , Ph.D. , and English, Kim, M.A. The Effect of Public Opinion on Correctional Policy: A Comparison of Opinions and Practice, " Colorado Department of Public Safely, Division of Criminal Justice; June 1989 . McDonald, Douglas C. , Editor, Private Prisons and the Public Interest, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick; 1990. Morgan Quitno Corporation, State Rankings , 1992 A Statistical View of the 50 United States , Lawrence, Kansas; 1992 . Ryan, Mick and Ward, Tony, Privatization and the Penal System, St. Martins Press; New York, 1989 . Thomas, Charles W. , "Correctional Facility Privatization - How it Redefines Legal Rights of Prisoners, " The Privatization Review, Vol . 6, No. 1; Winter, 1991 . 931249 "Prisoners ' Rights and Correctional Privatization, " Business and Professional Ethics Journal, " Vol. . 10, No. 1; Spring, 1991 . "Resolving the Problem of Qualified Immunity for Private Defendants in Section 1983 and Bivens Damage Suits, " Paper presented at the Southern Conference on Corrections, Tallahassee, Fl. ; February 24, 1992 . Thomas, Charles W. and Hanson, Linda Calvert, "The Emergence of the Private Corrections Industry, " Partnership Focus, W1.22, No. 2; March, 1991 . "The Implications of 421 U. S.C. Vs 1983 For the Privatization of Prisons, " Florida State University Law Review, Vol . 16, No. 4; Spring, 1989 . Thomas, Charles W. and Foard, Suzanne L. , "Private Adult Correctional Facility Census, " Private Corrections Project, Center for Studies in Criminology and Law, University of Florida, ; June 30, 1992 . Thomas, Charles W. and Logan, Charles H. , "The Development, Present Status , and Future of Correctional Privatization in America, " Paper presented at the American Legislative Exchange Council, Miami, Fl. ; March 23, 1991 . "The Privatization of American Corrections - A Selected Bibliography, " University of Florida, March 1992 . United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "News; " June 29, 1992 . 931249 ADDENDUM TO A PRIVATE PREPAROLE PRISON IN THE LOCAL ECONOMY • Research on the local economy funded by Weld/Greeley Economic Development Action Partnership and The UNC Research Corporation Prepared by Ann J. Garrison Economics Department University of Northern Colorado March 14, 1993 93i249 INTRODUCTION The private sector has always been involved with correctional facilities ( jails, detention centers, and prisons) in the United States . Historically the involvement centered on providing specialized services and housing juveniles . The move toward privatization of public goods and services started with the published results of President Reagan' s Commission on Privatization. The net results of this Commission were that the private sector is able to provide services at a cost below that attributable to government agencies and at a quality level equal to or better than that of agencies (President' s Commission on Privatization; Privatization: Toward More Effective Government, 1988) . Before the privatization movement could begin in the arena of correctional facilities there had to money for capital construction and start up of the facilities, enabling laws, and experienced correctional administrators . The first private correctional facility occurred in 1983 in Nashville. In 1992 there were contracted facilities in Alabama, California, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Colorado, New York, and Washington. BENEFITS AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RESOURCE USE Every use of scarce resources involves benefits and costs . The economic analysis of resource use for private or public gain should be based on both monetary and nonmonetary benefits and costs . The monetary benefits involved with the development of any private business includes the total income, employment, and value added that result to the business and area where the business is located. The costs surrounding the same business would include foregone opportunities because resources were used for the development and operation of this business rather than alternative businesses . If the expected benefits received from the enterprise exceed the expected costs of the business, the use of the scarce resources would be considered advantageous . Lower per diem costs of private correctional facilities yield important cost savings and the quality of service of these institutions have been shown to be equal or greater than public institutions . The lower costs and the high quality of service represent benefits to residents beyond the county. Prison quality indexes are used to measure the quality of the correctional institution. Since the national accreditation standards of the American Correctional Association can be applied to both public and private prisons, they allow for a comparison between both public and private prisons and different types of private prisons . They indexes are arrived at by standard surveys of inmates, people who work at the prison facilities, and review of prison data. With the quality index used, a score of 100 would be perfect. New Mexico' s private prison had the highest ranking in the state; the Cleveland Texas Pre-release facility received a score of 97 . 5 percent; the Venus Texas Pre-release Center received 931249 a score of 99 .7 percent, and the Bridgeport Texas Pre-release Center had 98 .43 percent for a score (Bowman, Hakim, Seidenstat, 1993) . The expected benefits of the proposed private preparole prison would include the following: IMPACT OF OPERATION Employment 138 jobs Output $9 . 34 Million Value Added 6. 41 Million Income 6.24 Million These monetary benefits would occur within Weld County (Garrison, 1992) . A study released in 1985 by the California Senate Office of Research found that property values rose faster in cities with prisons than in cities without prisons . The study also showed that homes near prisons often sold for high prices. " In the Corona-Norco area, homes in a new development across the street from the California Rehabilitation Center sell for between $216, 000 and $227, 990 . In Folsom, new homes located within one-half mile of the new prison sell for between $160, 000 and $320, 000 (Private Corrections Project; Center for Studies in Criminology and Law; Florida, 1992 ) . In 1987 two researchers, Abrams and Lyons, made a comparison between seven cities with prisons and seven cities without` institutions of correction. This study showed that property values and crime rates were not adversely affected by the presences of prisons . In six of the seven cities with correctional facilities property values were not adversely affected; in the one city the decrease was due to poor public relations (Private Corrections Project; Center for Studies in Criminology and Law; Florida, 1992) . Abrams and Lyons also showed that six out of the seven communities did not have higher crime rates because of the presence of prisons, and the 1985 California study showed that there were lower crime rates in cities with correctional institutions (Private Corrections Project; Center for Studies in Criminology and Law; Florida, 1992 ) . The one city in the study done by Abrams and Lyons that had higher a crime rate had this higher rate as a result of another land-use-planning decision. A urban shopping center created the increased rate. Data of the California Department of Corrections also shows that inmate families do not flock to the cities where family members are in prison. The few families that did move to prison cities were not noticeably different from other residents. Since the California , data deals with prisons containing prisoners with relatively long sentences, there would be less incentive for families of prisoners in a preparole facility to move to the city where the facility is 931219 located. In addition, the incentive would be further reduced by the prisoner being returned to the county where the crime was committed. If property values fell, if crime rates rose, or if welfare costs rose due to migrating families of prisoners, the results would be higher costs due to the operation of the prison, or in this case private preparole prison. If property values rise, or if crime rates fall, the changes in the variables would be benefits . In January, 1993 Talmey-Drake released the results of a survey dealing with crime and prisons . The survey showed that 45 percent of the people wanted to reduce prison sentences for non-violent crimes (particularly drug use) rather than build more new prisons. The publication said, "While the 45% to 40% support for sentence reduction is not exactly a thumping mandate for change, the finding is significant nonetheless, because for the past decade the war on crime and drugs has been treated as a motherhood issue in the Legislature. The fact that so many Coloradans are disinclined to favor further escalation suggests a sea change is occurring" (Talemy-Drake Report, 1993) . CRIME IN THE AREA IN 1990 In Weld County (and in Windsor) we have specialized in assaulting each other and stealing from each other. What most people fail to recognize is that we live every day with people who are criminals. Most people who committed crimes face a very small probability of being caught, prosecuted, and incarcerated for a crime committed in Weld County, or any other location of the country. In 1990 the Colorado Bureau of Investigation showed that there were 8, 625 index crimes in Weld County. Out of this 8, 625 crimes, 2,015 were cleared. Windsor had 215 index crimes, and 39 were cleared ( 1990 Colorado Bureau of Investigation) . If the crime was not cleared, the criminal remained with us . National studies done by economists show that the arrest ratio is the fraction of crimes that lead to an arrest. This ratio is believed to be about 0 . 16 (O' Sullivan, 1993) . Only about nine out of 100 felony arrests generate a prison sentence (O'Sullivan, 1993) . Economic studies have shown that crime victimization rates are dependent on income, place of residence, and race. Victimization rates are generally higher for the poor, racial minorities, and the residents of central cities . Investments in education and job training reduce the amount of crime (O' Sullivan, 1993) . Many property crimes are a result of drug addition. Our approach to drug addition has been to make the drugs illegal. This supply- side approach generates a trade-off between drug control and 931249 property crime. Drug enforcement policies reduce drug consumption, but they increase the total amount spent on drugs by the addict. This increased expenditure in turn generates more property crime. The increased property crime increases the need for more expenditures on police, jails, and prisons. Demand-side policies do not have the same trade-off . PRISONS AND THE LOCAL EMPLOYMENT BASE Any type of correctional facility is a labor intensive, clean, stable and recession proof business . Census data ( 1980 and 1990) for Bay County Florida, Hamilton County Tennessee, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, Houston, Texas, Laredo, Texas, and Levenworth, Kansas showed no apparent negative impact on population growth or the growth of the employment base. Some of the areas grew faster than others . Long run economic growth is a function of asset management (Mark Drabenstott, 1993) . Areas with good infrastructure, an educated population, a high labor force participation rate, and low taxes combined with good government services will have the best chance for long run economic growth. Two ways to expand an economy include increasing exports to bring new income and money into the local economy and decreasing imports to stop the leakage of income and money out of the local economy. A private preparole prison would be an export business . All the revenue that would be generated would originate outside of the county's economy. 9312'19 BIBLIOGRAPHY Bowman, Gary, Hakim, Simon, and Seidenstat, Paul, Editors; Privatizing Correctional Institutions, Transaction Publishers; New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1993 . Colorado Bureau of Investigation, 1990 Index Crimes, Denver, Colorado, 1991 . Drabenstott, Mark, "The District' s Long-Term Growth Prospects, " Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Economic Review, First Quarter, 1993 . Garrison, Ann, "A Private Preparole Prison in the Local Economy, " Greeley, Colorado, 1992 . O'Sullivan, Arthur; Urban Economics, Richard D. Irwin Publishers, Homewood, Ill, 1993 . President' s Commission on Privatization, "Privatization: Toward More Effective Government, " Washington, D.C. 1988 . U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1980 and 1990 Census Data, Washington, D.C. Private Corrections Project, Center for Studies in Criminology and Law, University of Florida; "Efforts to Encourage Community Receptiveness, " Gainesville, Florida, 1992 . Talmey-Drake Report, Vol 2, No. 1; Boulder, Colorado, January, 1993 . 9312/19 December 7, 1993 -. 613 37th Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 Weld County Commissioners Centennial Complex Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Sirs: Please accept this letter in support of the planned Pre-Parole Prison to be built in Southern Weld County. I have tried to evaluate the information provided to the Public in an objective fashion and find that on balance, the advantages outweigh any perceived disadvantages. Increases in tax revenues and jobs will be substantial in an industry that is both safe and non-polluting. Other communities that have similar facilities have found that risks to that community are much less than is frequently perceived. Please give this project which will benefit Weld County the support is deserves. ncerely, ames W. Davies �, (5) 9a123J XXXXX £U Hello