Statement on Why Arkansas Should Sell the Franklin County Prison Property

Yesterday, August 25, I attended the joint meeting of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees as lawmakers discussed prison capacity in Arkansas and the question of how many additional beds our state actually needs.

Arkansas does have a correctional capacity problem. County jails should not be forced to indefinitely house state inmates because there is nowhere else to put them, and we have a responsibility to make sure our correctional system has the capacity necessary to protect the public and safely house those sentenced to state custody.

But as I listened to the discussion, I kept coming back to a fundamental concern about the Franklin County prison project:

It feels as though we have put the cart before the horse.

The state purchased approximately 815 acres in Franklin County for a proposed 3,000-bed prison before the General Assembly had approved the specific construction appropriation necessary to build it.

Since then, the Arkansas Senate has been asked five separate times to approve the funding needed to move the project forward.

Five times, that appropriation has failed.

At the same time, the people who would actually live with this project have made their concerns clear. Since the prison was announced, residents of Franklin County have repeatedly voiced strong opposition. Local officials and community leaders have raised concerns of their own, and questions have emerged regarding infrastructure, water availability, cost, and whether this location makes sense for a facility of this size.

Those concerns deserve to be taken seriously.

And after attending yesterday’s committee meeting, I believe there is an even more basic question we have to ask:

If we are still examining how many additional prison beds Arkansas actually needs, what those beds should cost, and what approach provides the best value for taxpayers, why did we purchase the land and commit ourselves to a specific 3,000-bed proposal before those questions had been fully resolved?

That process feels backwards.

Good government should work in the opposite order.

First, determine the need.

Then evaluate the available options.

Determine what taxpayers can reasonably afford.

Study the infrastructure requirements and long-term operating costs.

Listen to the communities that would be affected.

Secure legislative approval.

And only then should the state purchase property and move forward with construction.

That process matters because fiscal responsibility is about more than whether government can find the money to spend. It is about making sure we are spending taxpayer dollars wisely and making decisions in the proper order.

The approximately $2.95 million already spent purchasing the Franklin County property should not become a reason to spend hundreds of millions more simply to justify the original decision. That money has already been spent. The question before us now should be what course of action makes the most financial sense for Arkansas going forward.

After five failed attempts to secure the necessary appropriation, sustained opposition from the surrounding community, unresolved questions about the site, and continued legislative debate about Arkansas’s actual correctional capacity needs, I believe we have reached the point where the state should move on from this property.

I support selling the Franklin County land.

I also support Senator Bryan King’s call for the state to sell the Franklin County property. After five failed appropriations, continued local opposition, and serious questions about the viability of this site, I believe he is right that Arkansas should recover as much of the taxpayers’ investment as possible and pursue more financially responsible options for addressing our correctional capacity needs.

The state should begin by obtaining an independent appraisal and then follow the proper competitive process to ensure taxpayers recover as much of their investment as possible.

Continuing to hold the property indefinitely in the hope that the same proposal will eventually gain enough support to move forward is difficult to justify when the Legislature has repeatedly declined to fund it and the surrounding community has consistently objected to it.

Selling the property would not mean turning away from Arkansas’s prison capacity problem. It would mean acknowledging that addressing a legitimate problem does not require the state to remain committed to a particular solution when the facts, the finances, and the legislative reality point in another direction.

Quite the opposite.

Selling the property would allow us to move beyond a project that has become increasingly difficult to justify and focus our attention on finding the most practical, fiscally responsible, and sustainable solution to the problem we actually have.

Arkansas may need additional prison beds. But recognizing that need does not require us to conclude that every proposed prison is the right prison, that every proposed site is the right site, or that taxpayers should continue pursuing a project simply because money has already been spent.

There comes a point when responsible stewardship requires us to reassess a decision and be willing to change course.

After five failed appropriations, significant local opposition, unresolved questions surrounding the site, and a legislative discussion that is still asking fundamental questions about how much additional capacity Arkansas actually needs, I believe we have reached that point.

Sell the Franklin County property. Recover as much of the taxpayers’ investment as possible. Then start with the question we should have answered first:

What does Arkansas actually need?

From there, develop the plan, determine the cost, secure the funding, and only then choose the land and move forward.

Need first. Plan second. Funding third. Land and construction after that.

That is not opposition to public safety.

That is responsible government.

With respect for all Arkansans,

Joshua Irby

Paid for by Joshua Irby