Santa Clarita / Antelope Valley : Lancaster May Ask for 2nd State Prison

In a major turnabout, city officials who once strongly fought the recently opened state prison in Lancaster--the first in Los Angeles County--are now talking with corrections officials about a possible second prison nearby in the west end of town.

The Lancaster City Council, in a closed-door meeting Monday, discussed the possibility of the city acquiring a west Lancaster site to sell to the state. And then in another private session the same day, city officials discussed that concept with a state prisons official.

The talks stem from a remark by state Department of Corrections Director James Gomez during the June 4 dedication ceremonies for the $207-million prison in west Lancaster, which opened Feb. 1. At the dedication, Gomez asked if local officials would be interested in a second facility.

During 1990 and ‘91, Lancaster officials waged a costly legal fight in an unsuccessful bid to block the original prison mandated by the Legislature. But with that prison now open, employing up to 800 people and causing no apparent problems, city officials said they have had a change of heart.

“I’ve been pleasantly surprised with the reception the community has given the prison we presently have,” said Lancaster City Manager Jim Gilley. “I haven’t heard any bad reports,” added Mayor Arnie Rodio, saying prisons are an industry and the recession-plagued city wants industry.

The state already has three other prisons under construction and three more planned in other communities. But corrections officials recently have projected the need for an additional six prisons, costing $1.7 billion by 1998, to accommodate an expected inmate population of nearly 141,000.

Solange Brooks, a spokeswoman for the Department of Corrections, added that the department’s recent siting pattern has been to locate new prisons near existing ones, making Lancaster a viable option. “It’s easier to go where you’re wanted,” Brooks explained.

Rodio said the city’s discussions with the state have centered on a medium and maximum security facility with 2,000 or more cells, comparable to the existing prison. Rodio said state officials also have mentioned possibly including an inmate reception center as well.

City officials said they have suggested to the state a possible site: a one-mile-square area of privately owned property between avenues G and H, and between 50th and 60th streets west. That is one mile north of the existing prison and just south of the county’s Fox Field airport.

During the closed-door council meeting Monday, Rodio said council members discussed what kind of demands the city would make on the state as part of any prison deal, such as contributions to local schools or development of infrastructure in the area.

Lancaster City Atty. David McEwen said the council was entitled to discuss the prison issue in closed session under a provision of state law that permits government agencies to meet privately to instruct their negotiations on the price and terms of land sales or purchases.

However, Rene Allison, an attorney with the California Newspaper Publishers Assn., called the closed session illegal since it apparently dealt more with the terms of the possible prison deal between the city and the state than with any city offers to the actual owners of the subject property.

Before proceeding, Lancaster officials plan to solicit community views on a possible second prison. And Lancaster isn’t the only city interested in getting a new state prison. California City, Delano and Blythe are other California cities that have expressed similar interest, Brooks said.