THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, June 21, 1995 TAG: 9506210006
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A12 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 70 lines
The Northampton County Board of Supervisors stuck by a promise last week when it killed a state plan to build an $85 million maximum-security prison there.
The rural Eastern Shore county is known nationwide for its efforts to promote development that does not damage its fragile ecosystem. Some six months ago the supervisors had informed the state, and promised their constituents, that they would neither approve nor disapprove construction of a prison until a number of studies were done, including one to predict the prison's effect on the environment, especially the water.
Jerry Kilgore, secretary of public safety, wrote the supervisors on June 9: ``We cannot continue to wait on the board's action and cannot spend $100,000 for an environmental study without some commitment from the board that a positive vote for the prison would result should the environmental-impact study prove positive.''
Their hands forced, but refusing to cave in, the six supervisors unanimously rejected the prison. Since the governor has publicly pledged not to build prisons where they are unwelcome, the rejection means the prison will have to be built somewhere else.
The supervisors gave up 425 prison jobs in an area where the average annual salary for African Americans and Native Americans is under $6,000. The prison's annual payroll would have exceeded $16 million.
Still, the supervisors stuck with their promise not to commit themselves until all studies were done. The environmental study was the only one left to do. (Actually, the state had done an earlier one, but it was far below state standards, as much a joke as a study.)
Prior to receipt of Secretary Kilgore's letter, some of the supervisors reportedly had been leaning in favor of the prison, which was to hold 1,276 inmates. One poll showed the majority of residents favored it, though the opposition was heated. Most residents thought the board would approve the prison, and many were shocked when it didn't.
Charles S. Bell of Machipongo, a retired biology teacher and chair of the board of supervisors, explained the vote: ``The state having opted not to complete the environmental study left us no choice but to do what we did.''
Northampton County Administrator Tom Harris said an editor for Governing Magazine, a trade publication for local governments, told him Northampton might have been the only government in the country ever to deal with a proposed prison site objectively, rather than politically.
Certainly any other Virginia county considering a prison would be wise to study the methods Northampton used - a textbook case of data collection.
Bill Cimino, a spokesman for Secretary Kilgore, said it would have been unwise to risk the $100,000 on a study that might not lead to construction of the prison, even though the study showed no environmental dangers.
On the other hand, the supervisors had made a promise. Also, tentatively agreeing to build the prison would have weakened the county's bargaining position when it sought money to meet prison-related strains on the landfill, sewage system, courts, health care and other services.
Now the state has less time to find a site for a maximum-security prison that will be needed by 1999. Over the next 10 years, the state is projected to require 23,000 new prison beds in up to 20 prisons.
More county supervisors are going to be thrust onto the hot seat. Lifelong friendships will be tested, if not smashed. Bell and Harris said the state could have more difficulty finding prison sites if it continues to decline to do environmental-impact studies until after commitments to building prisons are made.
To say the least, the search for prison sites all across Virginia is going to be interesting and probably painful. by CNB