Where I Stand — Mike O’Callaghan: High cost of politics

Friday, Nov. 26, 1999 | 9:19 a.m.

Mike O'Callaghan is the Las Vegas Sun executive editor.

BUILDING PRISONS, or any other major institution designed to meet social needs, shouldn't be done to simply help the local economy. Prisons spend taxes; they don't produce funds for the treasury of any nation, state, county or city. Placing prisons or other such institutions in isolated areas simply runs up the operating costs and hinders the administrators from recruiting and keeping high-caliber professional staff. Most Nevadans know this but politicians continually press for the building of prisons in places like Lovelock, Ely and Pioche.

The last big push for this kind of nonsense was in 1990. That year a political commitment to place a women's prison in Pioche was almost signed and sealed until Assembly members Myrna Williams, Jan Evans, Matt Callister and Morse Arberry rebelled. Along with some help from Sen. Tom Hickey, the foolish plan was scrapped.

Early this month the Reno Gazette-Journal did a study on what is happening at the new state prison in Lovelock and the older one in Ely. Reporter Bill O'Driscoll wrote, "Nevada's two rural prisons face a staffing shortage that officials insist hasn't compromised safety but still strains those who, in the case of Lovelock Correctional Center, commute from as far as Reno, 95 miles away.

"They often work double shifts, at overtime pay, to make up for the growing number of vacancies.

"And given the prisons' locations in Lovelock and Ely, with limited housing and amenities, many staffers face family opposition to moving.

"At Lovelock, nearly 54 percent of the staff commutes from Reno, Fernley, Fallon and Winnemucca. Subsequently, the city has yet to reap the economic bounty it hoped for when the prison opened four years ago."

Later in the same article O'Driscoll pointed out that in Lovelock's medium-security prison there are 37 vacancies, up from 28 in May, out of 213 positions. The maximum-security prison in Ely has 54 open slots. Bob Gagnier, head of the state employees union, is quoted as saying, "Both prisons are designed well. But especially in Ely, people are burning out faster than we can hire them." Gagnier went on to say, "They are frustrated. There are no security problems yet, but it will happen. Until someone gets killed, they won't pay much attention to it."

When the Sun fought the placement of the women's prison in Pioche more than nine years ago this column took issue with the plans to use the institution as a boost for the economy of Lincoln County. Additional information was gathered from corrections experts.

The American Correctional Association promotes the "proximity to a civilian population center is essential in order to augment the services provided directly by the institution, to provide greater recruitment and training opportunities for staff, to accommodate visitors, and to provide educational and employment opportunities for inmates on work or study release. Nearby social agencies, schools, colleges, universities and hospitals are potentially valuable resources for a correctional institution."

The National Institute of Justice, in a study for the Bureau of Prisons, recommends:

* Location within 50 miles of a large population center (50,000 or more people) to ensure community resources for the facility -- housing, potential staff, and goods and services.

* An accredited full-service hospital, recognized and licensed by the state in which it is located, within one hour's distance.

* Fire protection services, with a public-service fire company preferred.

* Higher education facilities nearby, with accredited colleges or universities and a wide variety of technical schools.

* Accessibility to public transportation and major highway systems, preferably with commercial ground and air service nearby.

The Reno newspaper, after looking closely at Nevada's rural prisons, editorialized: "Locating new prisons in Ely and Lovelock was a noble effort by the Nevada Legislature to boost the economies of two rural towns in need of help. Unfortunately, the decision was probably a mistake: The prisons have failed to give the towns' economies the kick-start they were looking for, and the remote locations are making it difficult to staff the two facilities."

The editorial ended with this warning: "In the future, however, the Legislature should heed the lesson of Lovelock and Ely: Build prisons where they best serve the state -- where employees and services are available -- not as economic development tools for towns in trouble."

Let's hope that this expensive lesson has been learned by politicians who have refused to listen to past warnings. It's a shame that Nevada taxpayers and their children will be paying for the errors made by the politicians who refused to listen to reason and experienced planners in past years.