Skepticism and Frustration: Lawmakers Question Choice of New Prison Site

On Tuesday, September 9, Arkansas legislators expressed frustration and concern during a Joint Performance Review Committee hearing over the proposed site of a 3,000-bed prison in Franklin County. Though JPR Co-Chair Senator Terry Rice of Waldron described the four-hour session as largely informational, the discussion grew increasingly tense.

A motion to subpoena former Arkansas Department of Corrections Secretary Joe Profiri failed on a voice vote, leaving several lawmakers visibly irritated. Profiri, now serving as a corrections advisor to Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders and reportedly still involved in the department’s operations, did not attend the hearing, drawing sharp criticism from committee members.

Petitioners Raise Opposition

The hearing was prompted by a petition from Adam Watson and Natalie Cadena, members of a coalition opposing the proposed Franklin County prison near Charleston.

The group has voiced strong objections, arguing that the state failed to adequately consult the community. Their petition outlines four main complaints: paying two leaders of the Department of Corrections for overlapping roles is improper; using a consultant while a state agency performs the same work misuses taxpayer funds; spending on a capital project without proper financing is irresponsible; and failing to properly investigate the property before acquiring it is improper.

At the heart of the petition was whether the state thoroughly examined the site before purchasing the 810-acre property. Watson and Cadena argued that the location lacked the infrastructure necessary to support a 3,000-inmate facility, pointing to limited water supply, insufficient roads, and a small local workforce. They also presented internal communications obtained through the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act to back their claims.

Concerns Turn to Frustration

Rep. Jim Wooten, R-Beebe, also raised serious concerns over the proposed Franklin County prison site, pointing to issues with water supply, infrastructure, and the absence of Joe Profiri, a key figure in the project discussions. While Wooten supports the prison in principle, he criticized the location, saying, “The location we picked is the wrong one,” and faulted the selection process for skipping essential preliminary tests, including soil analysis.

“Somebody needs to kick the chair back and tell the governor how it is,” Wooten added. “For one, I’m furious about the fact that Mr. [Profiri], whatever his name is, from Arizona, didn’t get here. … Committee members, that’s a slap at every one of you that the governor’s office is not here.”

Senator Terry Rice of Waldron echoed Wooten’s frustrations. “I think it is a slap at this body not to even answer us and say he cannot be here,” Rice said.

Some legislators shared these concerns, while others remained silent. Rep. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, whose district includes parts of Franklin County, said, “If half of what Watson and Cadena presented to the committee was accurate, then I don’t believe the state had done what it needed to do.” He added, “There seems to be an unwillingness to even consider another site at this point, and I don’t understand that either.”

Rep. Brit McKenzie, R-Rogers, questioned Anne Laidlaw, director of the Division of Building Authority, and Shelby Johnson, head of the geographic information services office, about whether other potential sites had been considered. Both officials confirmed that no alternative locations were examined following Governor Sanders’ announcement last year.

Sen. Jimmy Hickey Jr., R-Texarkana, said he attended the hearing hoping to find a path to fund the prison but left increasingly doubtful. An appropriations bill to fund construction, authored by Sen. Jonathan Dismang, was voted down five times during the 2025 regular session, with Hickey voting no each time.

“Obviously, with what’s come out, this isn’t going to work,” Hickey said. “I heard you say earlier that an existing water line had the potential to supply the prison. Well, the potential is going to cost how much more now?”

What Comes Next

While the hearing produced no immediate decisions, it underscored the strong opposition the project faces. As the Joint Performance Review Committee adjourned, the fate of the Franklin County prison site remained unclear. Lawmakers noted that the session revealed major gaps in planning, oversight, and community engagement. Both supporters and critics of the site now await further guidance from state officials, highlighting the need for transparency, careful planning, and meaningful input from the community before construction can move forward.