U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Correctional Institution Impact and Host Community Resistance

NCJ Number
83444
Journal
Canadian Journal of Criminology Volume: 24 Issue: 2 Dated: (April 1982) Pages: 133-139
Author(s)
H A Tully; J P Winter; J E Wilson; T J Scanlon
Date Published
1982
Length
7 pages
Annotation
This paper examines one Canadian community's resistance to a proposed prison reception center and then presents data on the social, psychological, and economic impact of a medium security facility built in another Ontario community in the 1960's.
Abstract
Despite an extensive public relations campaign in 1976, the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) encountered such strong public opposition to locating a reception center in Uxbridge, Ontario that it abandoned the project. A case study of the lengthy debate over this project revealed citizens were most concerned that the facility would endanger personal and public security. Residents also argued that the institution would offer few professional employment opportunities for locals, would not purchase supplies locally, could depress land values, and place extra burdens on public services. Citizens were suspicious of the municipal government which supported the proposal, the CSC, and the federal government. Data from a study of Warkworth Institution, built in the late 1960's near several Ontario communities, suggests that Uxbridge's fears about security were largely unfounded. The incidence of escapes, inmates unlawfully at large, and inmate perpetrated offenses at Warkworth was low. Complaints about the economic impact were realistic in some areas, since Warkworth provided only clerical and security jobs for locals and made few purchases locally. Land values were unaffected. Interviews indicated that members of the community were not upset by the institution's presence. This comparison suggests that the CSC is not marketing itself properly, particularly in providing objective information about the impact of a correctional facility on the host community. The paper provides two references.