Houston prison site axed

Dec. 1, 2006

By Michael Rovito

Frontiersman

PALMER - Houston city officials expressed disappointment this week after their area was dropped from a list of four proposed prison sites in the Mat-Su Valley.

A news release from the Mat-Su Borough late Tuesday said &#8220fatal flaws” at the Houston-Willow prison site prompted its removal from the list.

Problems such as a large wetlands area, only one access route and the risk of inflated costs are cited reasons for the borough's decision.

&#8220We had indications two to three weeks ago and started asking additional questions,” said Ron Swanson, the

borough's director of community

development.

Swanson said public comment did not sway the decision, since that part of the process has not yet been considered in its entirety. The possibility of a $60 million to $70 million difference in price for the Houston-Willow site was the biggest reason for the reconsideration. The prison is estimated to cost around $303 million.

The remaining three sites - Sutton, South Palmer and Point MacKenzie - also received the focused attention that brought to light the Houston-Willow problems, Swanson said, but no significant issues have been found that would warrant excluding those sites.

But that's not good enough for Steve Frost, Houston's deputy mayor. Frost said Thursday there has been what he called a &#8220cavalier dismissal” of Houston by borough officials.

&#8220They knew about this stuff before they put us on the list,” Frost said.

In a lengthy letter, Frost wrote that Houston officials and residents are trying not to take the situation personally, but they find it difficult, citing the abundant amount of support shown for their prison location.

Frost also said Borough Mayor Curt Menard has made it &#8220quite clear” the prison will be going to the South Palmer site, which, if true, most likely would incense Palmer residents. Halfway through his letter, Frost describes a Nov. 12 Alaska Municipal League conference in Juneau, where he said Menard only cited three locations up for the prison, dismissing it as an oversight when Frost told him he neglected to mention Houston.

In response to Frost, Menard said Thursday that he has been misquoted, and perhaps Frost misinterpreted his words.

&#8220The issue is that we will not make a final decision until it comes before the assembly,” Menard said. &#8220I'm not even making a decision on it now. It's before the people who are evaluating it.”

On vacation in Michigan for the past week, Menard clarified the Palmer site statements in question, explaining that he was pointing out the existing amenities, such as water, sewage and the proximity to the courthouse, that exist at the Palmer site, but added the caveat that housing and other aspects would also have to be taken into consideration.

&#8220It's not right for me, as a public official, to say it's going to be the Palmer site without having all the facts before me,” said Menard, who will not vote on the prison site unless the assembly is deadlocked after voting.

Ironically, the Houston-Willow site was the only area to garner residents' support. During a Nov. 18 public comment session at Houston High School, residents turned out to tell prison officials they support the prison and the economic boom that could come with it.

The Willow Chamber of Commerce also endorsed the location, saying local businesses could prosper from the growth a prison would spur.

Frost seemed most angered by the lost economic opportunities tied to the prison project, most notably a natural gas line to that area, construction jobs during the three-year construction, and later full-time jobs.

Now, local opposition groups in towns where the prison may be built said they are more worried now that the list is shorter.

In Palmer, Bill Quantick, a vocal member of the No Palmer Prison group, said Wednesday that he is a little more nervous now that the list is down to three sites. Even so, he said he remains confident.

&#8220We're going to continue going forward on this and not back down from it,” Quantick said.

A Wednesday evening hearing yielded similar results to that of Palmer's first public meeting, with more than 250 in attendance, according to borough records. All but three who testified opposed a prison for the Palmer site.

In Sutton, an area that largely opposes a new prison, Nancy and Dan Dryden, that area's vocal opposition leaders, said they are more nervous now with the slimmed down site list.

The Drydens recently collected some 250 signatures to show borough officials there is no interest in a prison in

Sutton.

Many residents in that town blame what they call a poor relationship with the Palmer Correctional Facility in Sutton for the jaded view of prison development in the Valley.

The ongoing public comment session officially ended Wednesday.

In the coming months, the matter will go before the borough's Planning Commission on Dec. 18, and eventually will end up in front of the assembly for a final vote.

The assembly is the only body that can approve a location of the prison.

Contact Michael Rovito at 352-2252 or michael.rovito@

frontiersman.com.