A. Any regional jail authority constituted pursuant to Article 3.1 (§ 53.1-95.2 et seq.) or 5 (§ 53.1-105 et seq.) of Chapter 3 of Title 53.1 may contract with a private entity for the financing, site selection, acquisition, construction, maintenance, leasing, management, or operation of a regional jail facility.
1. Contracts entered into under the terms of this article shall be with an entity submitting an acceptable response pursuant to a request for proposals. An acceptable response shall be one which meets all the requirements in the request for proposals. However, no contract for correctional services may be entered into unless the private contractor demonstrates that it has:
2. Contracts awarded under the provisions of this article, including contracts for the provision of correctional services or for the lease or use of public lands or buildings for use in the operation of facilities, may be entered into for a period of up to thirty years, subject to the requirements for expenditure of funds by the local governing bodies.
3. No contract for correctional services shall be entered into which would adversely affect the tax-exempt status of obligations issued or to be issued to finance the facility, and unless the following requirements are met:
a. The contractor provides audited financial statements for the previous five years or for each of the years the contractor has been in operation, if fewer than five years, and provides other financial information as requested; and
b. The contractor provides an adequate plan of indemnification, specifically including indemnity for civil rights claims. The indemnification plan shall be adequate to protect the combination of counties or cities and public officials from all claims and losses incurred as a result of the contract. The indemnification plan shall include liability insurance in limits of not less than five million dollars. Nothing herein is intended to deprive a regional jail facility contractor or the combination of counties or cities of the benefits of any law limiting exposure to liability or setting a limit on damages.
d. An evaluation of the proposed contract demonstrates a cost benefit to the combination of counties or cities when compared to alternative means of providing the services through governmental agencies.
1994, c. 715.