Assembly says yes to Pt. Mac prison

Jan. 19, 2007

BY RUSSELL STIGALL

Frontiersman

MAT-SU - Point MacKenzie is the new prison site. It was selected Tuesday night by unanimous decision at the Mat-Su Borough assembly.

Construction will proceed at Point Mac unless the chosen site does not have enough water. Or unless the Mat-Su prison incurs cost overruns. Or unless disgruntled Point Mac residents delay the project with a class action suit.

Barring these, Alaska's largest medium-security prison will be built on the southwest corner

of site number 12, Point MacKenzie.

The prison process began in 2004 when the Legislature passed Senate Bill 65. The bill allocated $303.9 million to build a facility with a maximum of 2,251 beds.

The facility began as a 120-acre single-building footprint. Since Commissioner Joe Schmidt's appointment, the facility has grown to a 160- to 200-acre multi-building campus. The new design will reduce costs and help inmates as they transition from prison life to release, said Schmidt.

This added size, plus wetlands and public opinion, helped the site selection committee narrow the proposed sites from an original 16 down to two - Point MacKenzie and the alternate site, Sutton.

Tuesday's meeting was attended by a new element to the site selection process - a strong anti-Point MacKenzie contingency. Nearly half of the public comments Tuesday night were in opposition to locating the facility at the end of Knik-Goose Bay Road.

Point Mac property owner Earl Ernest said he will join others in the Lost Lake area who are seeking legal counsel for a class-action lawsuit against the Mat-Su Borough. Nearby landowners were not effectively notified during the site-selection process, Ernest said.

&#8220Maybe three homes were notified,” Ernest said. And the Point Mac area is so large and sparse, word did not get around, he said.

Renee Howard of Sutton spoke during the public comment period. Her statement echoed similar not-in-my-back-yard themes touched on by others during the public hearing process.

&#8220I am upset to hear Palmer people say ‘put it in Sutton' and for Sutton people to say ‘put it in Palmer',” Howard said. &#8220And I feel bad for the Point MacKenzie people who do not want it.”

But a prison is coming, she said, and she'd rather have it in Point MacKenzie.

Quality of life could be affected negatively by the prison, Howard said, and with it the area's economy.

&#8220Would you have it in your back yard?” she asked.

Point MacKenzie residents in favor of a prison shared a common theme. They wanted the utilities and fire services that the prison might bring.

Homesteader Larry Donahue said he and most of his family are in favor of a prison in their neighborhood. Roads and utilities are high on the list of reasons why, he said.

&#8220Wish it was Disneyland instead of a prison,” Donahue said.

But, it will be a good start for an economy and could be a good tax base for the borough, he said.

With estimated $58,000 per day delay costs compounded from inflation and the loss of money from continuing to send prisoners out of state, construction could be halted by cost overruns. The borough would not be saddled with these extra costs and would have to return to the state for assistance.

&#8220The borough will not participate in cost overruns,” Borough Manager John Duffy said.

Point MacKenzie also has had a history of quick-drying water wells.

Several test wells dug in the 1980s and 1990s experienced 100 percent drawdown in hours, according to a report by geotechnical consultants Shannon and Wilson Inc. The wells were sunk at depths of 100 to 400 feet, and were 5 or 6 inches in diameter.

Ron Swanson, the borough's community development director, said the borough would drill test wells this weekend and have results by the end of January. Shannon and Wilson Inc. will oversee the tests.

The final assembly vote was unanimous, with only minor amendments.

Assembly member Cindy Bettine, whose district includes Point MacKenzie, amended the prison site resolution to require a community advisory group of area residents. The group would give input on design issues, such as the effects of high-powered perimeter lights.

After water availability is established, the project will go out to Request for Proposals.

Contact Russell Stigall at

352-2267 or russell.stigall@

frontiersman.com.