Comments about ‘Prison relocation study wastes funds’

The Governor has it right on this but one thing should be looked at in regards to revenue for the state. The majority of the revenue in the state comes from corporate income taxes and sales taxes. Private development of the prime real estate near the point of the mountain would provide an offset to the 470 million for the relocation and may be worth it. There are other areas near urban locations which could be considered suitable locations. Its not a bad proposal lets hope the demagogues and the wolf criers don't rear their ugly heads on this one.

Just one question: How much do Greg Hughes and his developer buddies stand to gain from moving the prison and turning this prime real estate over to them?

The answer to that question will illustrate most of what the legislature of this state does and why they do it.

You assume to accuse but the only evidence you can give is your own old man bias.

OK - let's make this be the deal:

1) Multiple independent real estate appraisers determine the fair market value of the land the prison now occupies. Appraisers may not in any way be financially affiliated with Utah legislators or real estate developers. The land will not be sold under any circumstances for less than 90% of the mean appraised value.

2) The full cost to build a new state prison and for the move from Draper to the new location is to be added to the sale price for the land in Draper.

3) The developers agree to pay, for the life of the new prison, any increase in transportation and holding costs incurred by the state for prisoners and staff resulting from the new prison being located farther from Salt Lake City.

4) No public subsidies, tax breaks, or financial incentives of any kind will be given by any public agency for the new real estate development on this "prime" land in Draper.

That's the "free-market," taxpayer-protecting solution to this question. If developers agree to fully comply with each of those stipulations, then let them go ahead.

Anything less, however, is a deal-breaker.

As Blue stated, "If developers agree to fully comply with each of those stipulations, then let them go ahead." An excellent analysis and recommendation.

And, as noted by others, the driving force behind these failed efforts to move the prison is developers who have lobbied (and given money to) legislators who continue to order studies. Yet, each look at the issue gives the same result - it's in no way economically feasible to move the prison. Everyone would lose except the developers.

An additional recommendation: There should be some sort of inquiry or investigation into the legislators who have backed these developers. Specifically, we need to see who got the money from developers and what their votes were for pursuing studies. We need to drag into the light of day these legislators who are willing to hand the taxpayer's money over to the developers even though it's a lousy deal.

There isn't any reason to move the prison. If people do not like having a prison close to them they need to move.

Besides if they do decide to move the prison the developers will probably go to draper city and beg for tax breaks for developing the land.

Re: shaun_ | 4:36 p.m. Jan. 14, 2012
"There isn't any reason to move the prison"

As you yourself acknowledge this property could be developed for many uses and benefits, and could stimulate economic growth. Utah could make a deal to stick the new prison on the Goshute Indian Reservation.

I've never understood why it's so bad to live by the prison. I'd rather live by a prison than on a really busy street or close to train tracks. It's not like prisoners routinely escape or anything like that.

I say make the people that want to delevelope the land were the prison site is now, cover all the cost thats will follow, the training of new personnel the moving expense for the people who choose to move to have their job and give them no tax breaks for the project that they have in mind for the land that the prison sits on, make thewm foot the whole cost.