NEW HAMPSHIRE
 HALL OF SHAME


If you find our website useful, please consider sending us a contribution!!!

PCWG, 1114 Brandt Drive, Tallahassee FL 32308

 


Daniel Webster College
Nashua, New Hampshire
Aramark

July 17, 2009 FOX 25
This information was supplied by law enforcement and describes recent arrests and charges. All defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty in a court of law. On July 16, 2009 at approximately 8:00 am, Nashua Police Department Youth Services arrested Sharon Delio, age 46, on an arrest warrant obtained from the Nashua District Court charging her with Theft By Unauthorized Taking or Transfer, Consolidation, Class A Felony. An investigation by Nashua detectives revealed that Ms. Delio had stolen approximately $40,000 from her employer, Aramark Corporation, between June 2008 and June 2009. Ms. Delio was the Assistant Food Service Director at Daniel Webster College in Nashua, a client of Aramark Corporation.

New Hampshire Legislature
Thu May 2, 2013 nhpr.org

On a 13-11 vote, the New Hampshire Senate has blocked a House-backed measure to prohibit private prisons in the state. Senate Republicans killed the prohibition effort, saying that the legislature needs to be able to keep all options on the table. Senator Andy Sanborn told colleagues that private prisons can be more efficient, lowering overall corrections costs. "I believe we have an obligation to prove to the tax payers of New Hampshire, every day, that we are trying to spend their money wisely." But Senator David Pierce, a Democrat from Etna, says privatization turns inmates into commodities. "To delegate that power, and that authority, to entities whose success depends on how much profit they can exploit from each human being, invites abuse, it abdicates our responsibility to our prison population for their rehabilitation, and our commitment to restorative justice." Last month, the state rejected four companies’ proposals to take over New Hampshire prisons. State officials said the bids lacked proof that the firms could meet requirements for inmate medical care.

 

April 3, 2013 inzanetimes.wordpress.com

New Hampshire will not privatize its prisons, at least not in the near future.  That’s the decision announced by the state today with the release of a long-awaited analysis of bids submitted by four private firms in response to a 2011 Request for Proposals from the state. The state’s consultant, MGT of America, found that none of the bids met the requirements spelled out in the RFP.  All of them “had deficiencies from an operational standpoint.” [Click here for the report from MGT of America. Specifically, according to a parallel report released by the Departments of Corrections and Administrative Services, “all were non-compliant with meeting the Department of Corrections’ legal obligations.” “More specifically, the proposals exhibited a lack of understanding of the overarching legal requirements placed upon the DOC relating to the court orders, consent decrees and settlements which, in large part, dictate the administration and operation of their correctional facilities and attendant services to the inmate populations,” the state agencies said. The agencies concluded, “The immediate next step, taken in conjunction with the release of this report, is the formal cancellation of the solicitation process. This decision, based upon the detail provided above, is made in the best interests of the State.” That the private industry leaders were not able to explain how they would actually meet the state’s legal obligations should be seen as evidence that these companies can’t be trusted to operate prisons anywhere. MGT also reported that the staff compensation levels built into the privatization proposals was “one-half of the current compensation currently paid to similar positions in the state.” “The state should be concerned that this significantly lower wage may make it difficult to maintain a trained and experienced staff. This could result in high turnover and ultimately impact the safety and security of the correctional facilities,” MGT added. “In prior MGT studies of private correctional facility operations,” the report   elaborated, “we have found private correctional facilities with annual staff turnover rates of 42 percent compared to 13.3 percent for nearby public facilities. High turnover, which can result from non-competitive compensation levels, produces a chronically inexperienced work force with direct implications for the integrity of facility security and safety. Low compensation levels can also make staff recruitment more difficult, resulting in staff vacancies and reliance on overtime, which again has a negative impact upon facility security.” The state’s report leaves open the possibility that the state would entertain privatization as an option at some point in the future.  That would be a huge mistake.  Instead, the legislature should pass HB 443, a bill that blocks the state from considering privatization.  This measure has already passed the NH House and comes before the Senate Finance Committee next Tuesday.


March 21. 2013 unionleader.com

CONCORD -- The House on Thursday voted to forbid the executive branch from privatizing the state prison system, saying that to do so would shirk the state’s constitutional responsibility to rehabilitate inmates. The 197-136 roll call by the Democratic -controlled House sent House Bill 443 to the Senate, where Republicans hold a slim, 13-11 majority and the bill’s fate is uncertain, at best. The legislation, while prohibiting prison privatization, allows the governor to enter into a temporary contract with a private provider during times of a “corrections emergency” with the approval of the Executive Council. The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee had recommended that the bill pass on a 13-5 vote. Those who opposed the bill said that with a study of privatization underway, it is premature to have a ban take effect. A move to table pending more information on privatization failed. Rep. Dan McGuire, R-Epsom, argued that the state should not prevent itself from undertaking a private option. He said the prison population is expanding. But Rep. Robert Cushing, D-Hampton, privatizing prisons “is different than talking about who is going to pick up our garbage and plow our roads. “I don’t think we should be outsourcing incarceration,” he said. He said the state constitution requires the state to rehabilitate its prisoners, “yet there is a financial incentive for a private operator to keep those cells filled” and “fill corporate coffers. “When we take somebody’s liberty away from them, those who are overseeing that bondage should be responsible to the Governor of New Hampshire as opposed to a corporate entity,” said Cushing. House Republican Leader Gene Chandler argued unsuccessfully that with a study underway, “There are facts coming in on the issue and we have an obligation to look at the facts.”

December 5, 2012 Concord Monitor
The Executive Council voted yesterday to continue studying privatizing the state’s prisons, but going private has lost its biggest supporters at the State House. Incoming governor Maggie Hassan opposes putting inmate care in private hands, as does a majority of the next Executive Council. And Democrats, who have taken control of the House, haven’t shared their Republican counterparts’ appetite for privatization. But partial privatization – allowing a private company to build a prison the state would run – may have support in at least the corner office. Gov. John Lynch endorsed that approach in an interview this week with Monitor editors, saying it’s the state’s most expedient option for not only replacing the state’s inadequate prisons but also resolving a lawsuit over the shortcomings of the women’s prison. That’s especially true, Lynch said, with a Legislature that’s been unwilling to spend the necessary $350 million to $400 million to build a new prison. And in an email Tuesday, a spokesman for Hassan said a private-public partnership is an option she’d consider. “Governor-Elect Hassan opposes allowing private entities to run New Hampshire’s prisons, as the track record of such arrangements in other states has not demonstrated success in terms of protecting taxpayer dollars while maintaining the highest level of public safety,” wrote Marc Goldberg. “The Governor-Elect would consider the possibility of partnering with the private sector on prison construction only if the safety and security of our communities could be ensured along with clear savings to taxpayers.” The state began investigating privatizing the state’s prisons last year at the request of Lynch and state lawmakers, who wondered whether going private would save the state money. Prison expenses are climbing and two prisons – the men’s in Concord and the women’s in Goffstown – are overcrowded and failing.

September 6, 2012 Nashua Telegraph
As New Hampshire corrections and administrative personnel continue working with a consulting firm being paid $171,000 to evaluate proposals and weigh the pros and cons of privatizing a majority of the state’s prison system, a national expert on the subject is warning politicians and residents to step carefully and warily if the state goes down that path. Arizona resident Caroline Isaacs, program director of the American Friends Service Committee’s Tucson office, brought her expertise and thoughts on the subject to Nashua’s Unitarian Universalist Church on Wednesday night as part of her three-day, statewide speaking tour. Her extensive research and extensive writings culminated in “Private Prisons, the Public’s Problem: A Quality Assessment of Arizona’s Private Prisons.” “There’s a general belief that corporate privatization is more efficient and cost-effective,” Isaacs told about two dozen listeners. “But when you take a bureaucracy and put a for-profit corporation on top of it, it’s not the case at all.” Isaacs’ expertise is especially relevant in New Hampshire, as three of the four for-profit prison entities that submitted bids have built and are operating prisons in her home state. Though the contents of the bids haven’t become public, the corporations – Corrections Corporations of America, The GEO Group and Management and Training Corp. – fared poorly in Isaacs’ comprehensive analyses. The consensus found “a widespread and persistent problems in private facilities around safety, lack of accountability, and cost,” Isaacs wrote in her account, which was published in February – the same week the N.H. Executive Council voted 5-0 to hire Texas-based consultant MGT of America. Former Executive Councilor Debora Pignatelli, of Nashua, who is running for the District 5 seat she lost in 2010, said that if the state goes the way of privatization, it had better make sure it has air-tight agreements with the corporations. “The contracts need to be very, very clear that if (the firms) don’t live up to the terms, they can be held accountable,” Pignatelli said. To view Isaacs’ report, visit www.afsc.org /resource/arizona-prison-report.

September 5, 2012 Concord Monitor
If New Hampshire privatizes its prisons, it will spend more, not less, and risk losing control of corrections for good, according to activist Caroline Isaacs, who's in the state this week lobbying against private prisons. Isaacs, program director for the American Friends Service Committee in Tucson, Ariz., issued a blistering report in February about Arizona's several private prisons. Isaacs found security in private prisons lacking, staff poorly trained and the cost of housing an inmate higher at private prisons than at state-run prisons, according to her report. And, none of the private companies are measuring recidivism, according to her report. Aware that New Hampshire is considering hiring one of the three private prison companies operating in Arizona, Isaacs accepted an invitation from the New Hampshire chapter of the American Friends Service Committee to visit the state. "New Hampshire is at a critical juncture," Isaacs told a group of about 40 people yesterday at the University of New Hampshire School of Law. "You have not stepped off the cliff like we have in Arizona. This is the time when you and your elected officials need to be asking questions." The Rev. Alice Roberts, an Episcopal priest in Newport, had one yesterday: How can she get lawmakers' attention when private prison companies have well-paid lobbyists at the State House? Roberts is a member of the prison concern committee of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire, and intends to ask all the state's Episcopalians to join the committee in opposing private prisons. Isaacs's answer? Begin with the money argument, not the morality argument. It costs $48.42 a day to house an inmate at a state-run prison in Arizona, according to the state's own estimates. It costs $53.02 a day to provide the same security and services at one of the private prisons. Why then, UNH Law professor Erin Corcoran asked, do states still pursue privatization? "The facts fly in the face of what most people assume is true," said Isaacs. "They have always been told that private enterprise does everything better. "Even when you write 100 pages showing that is not happening," Isaacs added, referring to her February report. New Hampshire began contemplating privatizing prisons last year at the direction of the Legislature and Gov. John Lynch. Four for-profit prison companies have submitted bids to build a men's-only prison and a hybrid prison that would house men and women on the same campus. The state has not committed to privatizing prisons. Instead, the request for bids has been billed as an information-gathering exercise to determine whether the state would save money if a private company took over corrections. It's possible, state officials have said, the state will conclude it's cheaper to continue running corrections itself. That's increasingly possible given the upcoming gubernatorial election. The three Democratic candidates, Jackie Cilley, Maggie Hassan and Bill Kennedy, and Republican Ovide Lamontagne have said they oppose privatizing prisons. Republican Kevin Smith has not endorsed the idea but has said he'll take a wait-and-see approach. In looking at Arizona's private prisons, Isaacs found consistent problems with staffing, accountability and security, she said. • Following the escape of three inmates from one private prison, it was discovered that the prison's security system had been malfunctioning for two years. The company knew about the problem but never fixed it, Isaacs said. • Private prison companies don't include the costs of treating, educating or transporting inmates in their contract costs, she said. States that don't write contracts insisting those costs be covered will end up paying those expense separately. • Wages are lower at private prisons, she said. In Arizona, correctional officers were earning between $18 and $20 an hour at state-run prisons. At the private prisons, they were making between $10 and $12 an hour, she said. • The consequence of low wages has been high turnover, Isaacs said. As a result, a high percentage of private prison staff are inexperienced because they are new. And private companies cut costs by skimping on training, she said. So the staff are not only new, but also poorly trained. • Accountability is a problem at private prisons, especially when it comes to medical treatment and counseling. She gave an example of an inmate who complained to his family that he was not getting his medications. When the family called the prison, staff told them to call state corrections officials. The state directed the family back to the private prison. • States can find it difficult to get out of a bad contract. Isaacs said even if a state can break a contract without a heavy financial penalty, it's still stuck because it has nowhere else to house the inmates. The private companies operating in Arizona - the GEO Group; Management & Training Corp. and Corrections Corp. of America - are each seeking contracts in New Hampshire. Isaacs was asked whether her report could be fairly applied outside of Arizona. "It's a cautionary tale," she said.

August 19, 2012 Union Leader
Three out-of-state companies vying to build a new men’s prison in New Hampshire have paid more than $130,000 in lobbyist fees to three Concord firms to win support for their proposal, according to state records. Corrections Corporation of America, based in Nashville, Tenn., outpaced its rivals, providing more than $101,000 to the Rath, Young and Pignatelli law firm since 2011, according to a New Hampshire Sunday News review of lobbyist income and expense reports. “Generally speaking, because governments are our partners, we obviously educate through government relations,” CCA spokesman Mike Machak said in an email. “It’s how we transparently share information about the services and solutions we provide and make sure we’re up to date on any specific needs they may have.” The law firm, which includes a section devoted to government relations, reported it spent all $101,729.85 it collected in lobbying fees from CCA since 2011. State law requires lobbyists to submit certain financial information regarding its clients. According to paperwork lobbyists must submit to the Secretary of State’s Office, lobbyists are required to report all fees “that are related, directly or indirectly, to lobbying, including fees for services such as public advocacy, government relations, or public relations services including research, monitoring legislation, and related legal work.” David Collins, director of government relations at the Concord law firm, deferred questions to CCA, which declined to talk specifically about its lobbying efforts in New Hampshire. William McGonagle, the state’s assistant corrections commissioner, said he’s aware of the lobbyists, but said the process for reviewing proposals is private at this point. “They’re out there,” McGonagle said. “I know they’re out there talking with legislators and the like.” The Legislature would need to approve funding any new prison received, he said. Fran Wendelboe, a former legislator and current registered lobbyist not involved in the prison proposals, said lobbyists can prove to be powerful forces. “On many occasions, they write the ... legislation,” Wendelboe said. “The lobbyists are considered the expert or who they represent are considered the experts.” Four companies submitted proposals — some topping $100 million — to build the prison. Some call for a privately run prison while others allow for the state to run it. Three state evaluation teams are privately reviewing the proposals. A recommendation is expected to reach the governor’s office and the state departments of corrections and administrative services in October, McGonagle said. Bruce Berke, a lobbyist with the Sheehan Phinney Capitol Group that represents Management & Training Corp., confirmed the receipt of $24,000 in fees, but referred further questions to his client. Issa Arnita, director of communications for the Centerville, Utah-based company, said in an email: “At times we hire lobbyists to educate various groups on the benefits of public/private partnerships in corrections. “We are participating in the competitive bid process, and we look forward to a decision by the state of New Hampshire,” Issa wrote. Berke’s firm on its website says its lobbyists “utilize their knowledge of the legislative and regulatory process and their long-term, trusted relationships with decision makers to achieve their clients’ goals.” Management & Training Corp.’s proposal included building a prison on Hackett Hill in Manchester. A third firm, The GEO Group of Boca Raton, Fla., paid at least $10,000 to Dennehy & Bouley. Lobbyist Jim Bouley couldn’t be reached for comment, but GEO Group spokesman Pablo Paez said in an email: “Since the procurement in New Hampshire is ongoing, it wouldn’t be appropriate for us to comment on our proposal or the process. “Our company participates in the political process in states across the country, including New Hampshire, . . . as do a variety of organizations, including private corporations and organized labor organizations, through lobbyist representation and contributions to political candidates and parties who support different public policy viewpoints.” One company, NH Hunt Justice Group, has not hired any lobbyists. “We don’t see a need to lobby,” said Buddy Johns, president of CGL, an affiliate of the Hunt Companies, a Texas construction firm. Hunt Companies and LaSalle Corrections, a prison operator also based in Texas, have formed the NH Hunt Justice Group, which lists its home office in El Paso, Texas. He said the procurement process appeared straight forward. “Some people use outside services to make their point,” Johns said in a phone interview from Mexico. “I think we believe we’re the experts in what we do, and we’re best to make that point.” Johns has said his company proposed building a new prison next to the existing men’s prison in Concord. LaSalle Corrections, based in Texas, would manage the prison if the state didn’t. CCA, which declined to discuss its specific lobbying efforts in New Hampshire, met earlier this year with Lancaster community leaders to let them know they were one of at least three communities being considered to host a possible prison costing $100 million to $120 million. Northumberland and Hinsdale were the others, according to Lancaster’s town manager. McGonagle said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if the Legislature forms a committee to study the state prisons. If the governor and Executive Council approved a contract, the Legislature would need to weigh in on the financial implication on the state budget, he said. Wendelboe said lobbying money in general could be spent on research, campaign donations or hosting events for legislators. McGonagle said he has talked with lobbyists about general issues.

June 23, 2012 Concord Monitor
While political attention is focused on the end of a contentious legislative session and the beginning of a busy election season, a momentous decision is being considered behind closed doors in the Department of Administrative Services. There, Administrative Services and Department of Corrections staff are reviewing piles of documents from four corporations interested in taking over the state's prison system and running it for profit. If a contract with one of the private firms emerges in late summer or early fall, only then will policy-makers and citizens get to know the details of a deal with profound implications for public safety, the state budget, job quality and the constitutional obligation to support the rehabilitation of offenders. The private prison experiment in other states has gone poorly. For example, a detailed report released by the American Friends Service Committee in February on Arizona's experience revealed "widespread and persistent problems in private facilities around safety, lack of accountability, and cost." AFSC reviewed state data showing that private prisons under contract with the state cost more than equivalent units operated by the state Department of Corrections, and that all private prisons for which security assessment data was available had serious security flaws. "While no prison can be entirely safe or problem-free, private prisons demonstrate clear, long-standing patterns of prisoner unrest including riots, staffing and management issues, escapes, and other serious safety problems," said Caroline Isaacs, the report's author. All three of the private firms running prisons in Arizona have submitted bids for the opportunity to do the same here. One firm, MTC, operated the private prison in Kingman, Ariz., from which three people escaped last summer, kidnapping and murdering two campers and burning their bodies in their trailer. A review showed that tower lights were burned out, the perimeter was unwatched, and the alarm sounded so many false alarms nobody listened to it. Elaine Rizzo, a professor of criminal justice at Saint Anselm College, reviewed the record of prison privatization for the Citizens Advisory Board of the New Hampshire State Prison for Women. Her paper, co-authored with Margaret Hayes of Regis College and released at the end of January, reviewed issues of cost, public safety, and correctional policy and reached a stark conclusion: "Of greatest concern is the indisputable fact that private prisons exist to make a profit. It is in their economic interests to reduce costs by maintaining full facilities, reducing staff wages and benefits, reducing institutional expenses associated with safety and sanitation, and reducing critical care services and programming. These cost-saving measures come at the expense of institutional and public safety, and hold the potential for negative publicity and more costly lawsuits." Official financial documents from the private prison companies openly acknowledge that their business model depends on high rates of incarceration at a time when policy makers are looking for ways to lower costs and reduce recidivism. Despite growing evidence of problems in other states - riots, escapes, high levels of staff turnover - the prison companies are serious about moving into New Hampshire. The Corrections Corp. of America, the industry leader, has approached local officials in Lancaster and Hinsdale about real estate it thinks would be suitable for a large, new prison. Management and Training Corp., another bidder in the state process, has expressed interest in property on Hackett Hill Road in Manchester. The GEO Group and LaSalle/Hunt, the other two bidders, may be scouting for real estate as well. CCA, GEO and MTC have hired local lobbyists to represent their interests. Oddly, a decision to award a lucrative contract to a private prison operator could be made by the governor and Executive Council without any legislation directing them to do so and without much public discussion of whether privatization is in the state's interest. That should not be allowed to happen. The public deserves a full and open airing of the privatization issue, not a rush job slipped through the Executive Council while the eyes of voters and lawmakers are focused on other matters. (Arnie Alpert is New Hampshire program coordinator for the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker organization devoted to social justice and peace.)

May 12, 2011 NHPR
The Department of Corrections is warning a plan to privatize part of its operations won’t save the state money. NHPR’s Dan Gorenstein reports Commissioner Bill Wrenn told the Senate Finance Committee the move would actually cost the state. Finance Chair Chuck Morse has suggested one way the Department of Corrections could save over $10 million dollars next year is to send up to 600 inmates to private prisons. Morse estimates the state saves $1 million dollars for every 100 inmates it sends away. But DOC Commissioner Bill Wrenn says that math is all wrong. “You might save a little bit. But then you have to pay for the outsourcing, which is more than you are going to save. No one has poked holes in our numbers yet. No one has said to me, ‘Commissioner, your numbers are out of whack.’” In March, the House reduced the Correction’s budget by nearly $10 million dollars. Wrenn responded, saying to make that kind of cut he would be forced to close the Berlin Prison.

October 29, 2004 Concord Monitor
Gov. Craig Benson has said he is still considering shipping some inmates out of state to private prisons. But state officials who reviewed the proposals said they told Benson months ago the plan won't save the money predicted. Instead of the $19 million annual savings that Benson's efficiency committee projected, the state could save, at best, $300,000 a year, according to two people who reviewed the bids.
"We made our evaluation, and we sent it to the governor's office with our recommendation some months ago," said Rep. David Welch, a Kingston Republican who helped study proposals from two private prisons. "We just didn't see any significant cost savings. It's now up to the governor to act one way or another." And at staff meeting last month, Stephen Curry, corrections commissioner, told employees that the bids were still being evaluated, according to minutes of the meeting. When an employee confronted Curry with reports that the committee had concluded its study and had found no savings in the proposals, Curry said the matter was confidential.

June 10, 2004
A Merrimack Superior Court judge has set a date for a hearing in a state prison inmate's suit against Gov. Craig Benson over a plan to ship up to 1,000 medium security inmates out of state.  Two weeks ago, Judge Kathleen McGuire scheduled Nov. 22 as the day when inmate David Michaud can present his case.  The governor has proposed to send prisoners out of state as a cost saving measure.  In February, the governor's office sent out a request for proposal (RFP), asking companies to bid on the right to study the feasibility of moving up to 1,000 medium security prisoners out of state.  In March, the proposals were due, but only one company had bid by the deadline. The governor's office re-bid the proposal. So far, Benson has not taken steps to further the plan. During an open court hearing in April, Michaud argued the proposal by the governor is causing "anxiety" and "uncertainty" at New Hampshire State Prison.  Also, Michaud claimed the governor's office will automatically give the contract to Corrections Corporation or America, the only company to previously bid on the proposal. Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), participated in the governor's efficiency commission findings which recommended privatizing prison operations.  Michaud said this allowed the company to have vital information months before any other bidder. Concord attorney Andrew Serell, who represented CCA in Merrimack County Superior Court, said Michaud's claims were unfounded.  Last week, Benson nominated Brig. Gen. Stephen Curry to become the new Corrections Commissioner.  Executive councilors Ruth Griffin, R-Portsmouth, Ray Burton, R-Bath and Peter Spaulding, R-Hopkinton, all said they do not support the transfer 
and hoped, if confirmed by the council, Curry would not move forward with the proposal.  (N.H. statehouse)

March 13, 2004
After receiving only one bid, the state will rebid its proposal to send up to 1,000 prison inmates out of state, a spokesman for Gov. Craig Benson said Friday.  "We want to gather more information," said Wendell Packard. Packard said the new request for proposals probably will be issued next week.  The State Employees Association, which represents corrections employees, renewed its criticism of the effort Friday.  The union complained that the only bidder to date -- Corrections Corporation of America -- has a conflict of interest because it participated in a state Efficiency Commission that recommended privatizing prison operations.  (Boston.com)

December 15, 2003
If New Hampshire turned its entire prison system over to a private company, it would be the first state in the nation to do so. While private prisons provide space for 94,000 inmates across the country, no state has privatized all of its prisons. In fact, less than 7 percent of inmates nationwide are in private facilities.  The company cited by the government efficiency commission, Corrections Corporation of America, runs 59 jails and prisons with space for 59,000 inmates in 20 states. New Hampshire has four prisons with 2,500 inmates.  According to the report, the commission wants the state to consider sending prisoners to private prisons in other states, building private prisons here and having a private company take over the existing prisons.  How much New Hampshire would save is unclear. The report released yesterday says that a private company could save the state $11 per an inmate per day, with a total savings of $10 million a year.  But that figure is based on the cost of housing inmates at prisons out of state, according to John Babiarz, a member of the commission. It does not include the cost of transporting them.  Corrections Corporation of American, which the governor's office has asked to put together a proposal, said that it gave the commission the $57 a day figure as a ballpark estimate for the cost of housing inmates out of state, according to Steve Owen, a company spokesman. The company has not calculated how much it would charge to run the New Hampshire's prison system or if it would want to, Owen said. The Nashville-based company does not run any prisons in the Northeast.  Whether private prisons have an economic advantage over public ones is unclear, according to Dan Mears, a researcher at the Urban Institute in Washington, D.C., a group that studies criminal justice issues. Few unbiased studies exist, he said. The ones that do show minimal savings for privately run prisons.  And in some instances, the savings don't pay for themselves. States should look at hidden costs, like an inmate's ability to find a job and housing when he or she is released, and the possibility of lawsuits.  "If a private prison ends up hiring less quality staff than the state would and they end up abusing inmates, a lawsuit could result," Mears said.  And not only is the company liable, the state is as well, according to Mike Sheehan, a Concord lawyer who works on prison issues.  Critics of private prisons suspect that companies cut costs by understaffing, poor training for staff and reducing rehabilitative services like drug and alcohol counseling.  "You can save money, but the question is whether it's a good idea," said Philip Mattera, who helped write a report on Corrections Corporation of America.  According to Owen, Corrections Corporation saves the most money for its public clients in building new prisons. The company can complete projects more quickly than government agencies.  (C Monitor)

Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant
Seabrook, New Hampshire
Wackenhut (Group 4)

January 6, 2009 Portsmouth Herald
A nuclear power plant security officer was found guilty Tuesday of driving drunk and was fined, had his license revoked and was court-ordered to attend a residential treatment program. Matthew Butterworth, 31, of 31 Barker St., Methuen, Mass., appeared in Portsmouth District Court Jan. 6 when he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of driving while intoxicated. As part of a plea agreement, the charge was reduced from a second-offense DWI and a violation-level complaint alleging he drove the wrong way down Congress Street was dismissed. Represented by public defender Emily McLaughlin, Butterworth’s plea was his admission to driving drunk on Oct. 26, when Officer William Dubois saw him motor the wrong way through Market Square. In exchange for his plea, Judge Sawako Gardner imposed a $1,000 fine, with half suspended pending his good behavior for one year. The judge also revoked his license for 12 months and ordered him to attend the state’s residential seven-day multiple offender treatment program, or an acceptable equivalent. Following the reinstatement of his license, Butterworth is court-ordered to have an interlock device installed on any car owned or used by him for a period of one year. In his financial affidavit for determining eligibility for a public defender, Butterworth reported he works as a security officer at Seabrook Station through Wackenhut Security.

May 14, 2008 Seacoast Online
Three nuclear power plant security officers were the triggermen during separate accidental shootings during the past nine months, according to police. The most recent incident involved an off-duty Seabrook Station security officer who accidentally shot a 9 mm bullet through his hand and will face criminal charges after making some medical progress, said Seabrook Police Chief Patrick Manthorn. "He’s going to need quite a bit of reconstructive surgery," said Manthorn. "The bullet went through his palm and exited out the back of his hand. Because of the type of bullet, there was mushrooming, so the hole got bigger in the back." Manthorn is not naming the power plant shooter until charges are filed. The Seabrook chief did identify him as a resident of the Governor Weare Apartment complex, at 689 Lafayette Road, Seabrook, the same address where another off-duty nuclear plant officer misfired his gun in a different building during an unrelated incident. That shooting occurred Jan. 25 when power plant security trainer Joshua Hill pulled the trigger of his Springfield Armory handgun and shot a .45 caliber bullet through the floor of his apartment and into the living space below. Manthorn said Hill, a security instructor at the nuke plant, was cleaning his gun at the time "and didn’t realize it was loaded." The most recent shooting was "contained within the apartment," he said. Hill, 28, of 30 Lower New Zealand Road, pleaded guilty on Feb. 11 to a related charge of reckless conduct-placing another person in danger. In exchange for his plea, he was sentenced to 30 days in the Rockingham County House of Corrections, with all of it suspended pending his good behavior for one year and a $300 fine. A third recent and accidental shooting by a power plant officer was reported to Seabrook police in the fall, Manthorn confirmed Wednesday. That shooting occurred when the unnamed officer was holstering a 357 SigArms pistol and "a round went off in the (nuclear plant) armory," said Manthorn. No charges were filed, said the Seabrook chief. In 2002, another unnamed nuclear plant security guard was suspended without pay after he accidentally fired his gun inside a plant security post. Seabrook power plant officers are not employed by the plant, but by the Wackenhut Corporation, a $3 billion global security provider with headquarters in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla. In response to the Herald’s request for comment, Wackenhut spokesman Marc Shapiro said he was unavailable for an interview, while assuring, "all Wackenhut employees undergo a rigid employment screening process before hire. Then, they are thoroughly trained in accordance with (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) requirements."

April 29, 2008 Seacoast Online
Police are investigating an accidental shooting in the apartment of a nuclear power plant security officer, the second accidental discharge by an off-duty nuclear plant security officer this year. Both shootings occurred at the Governor Weare Apartment complex at 689 Lafayette Road, said Seabrook Police Chief Patrick Manthorn, adding they occurred in different buildings during unrelated incidents. Manthorn said the most recent shooting by a Seabrook Station security officer involved a 9 mm handgun and was "contained within the apartment." The police chief said details, including the date of the incident, whether any injuries resulted and the security officer’s identity, will not be immediately released due to an ongoing investigation. "We may be charging him criminally," said Manthorn. On Jan. 25, power plant security trainer Joshua Hill pulled the trigger of his Springfield Armory handgun and shot a .45 caliber bullet through the floor of his apartment into the living space below. "He was cleaning his weapon and didn’t realize it was loaded," said Manthorn. Hill, 28, of 30 Lower New Zealand Road, pleaded guilty on Feb. 11 to a related charge of reckless conduct-placing another person in danger. In exchange for his plea, he was sentenced to 30 days in the Rockingham County House of Corrections, with all of it suspended pending his good behavior for one year and a $300 fine. Hill was fined an additional $500, with $250 suspended contingent on the same year of good behavior, said the Seabrook police chief. Both security officers are employed by Wackenhut, a global security provider. Seabrook Station spokesman Alan Griffith said he had no comment on either case, including whether the incidents affected the officers’ employment at the nuclear power provider. Griffith said because the shootings did not occur on power station property and were "off hours," public comment about the men’s private lives is not appropriate. "Safety is paramount" at the plant, said Griffith, adding "if someone is involved in a situation" it is investigated fully and there are consequences when appropriate. In 2002 an unnamed nuclear plant security guard was suspended without pay after he accidentally fired his gun inside a plant security post. Griffith described it then as "an accidental discharge of his sidearm."