Published: Sunday, March 17 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
Yes, and let's make sure it doesn't provide profits for a few
developers and other fat cats at taxpayer expense.
I have no problem moving the prison... Just as long as those land developers and
their bought off politicians pay for it. NOT taxpayers.
Dwayne, will you please fill me on exactly what "special interests" I
have hidden? I'm sure not aware of any other than my disgust with special
interests.Note, please, that I DID NOT object to moving the prison.
It may be a very good thing. But let's not stick taxpayers with the bill
while allowing a few developers, financiers, and other special interests to
profit at our expense.May I submit that the "special
interests" are not mine, but theirs? Let's bring all aspects of this
out into the open and then proceed with whatever will be best.
dwayne,one question: Why should I or anyone else care if the families of
the people convicted of a crime and sentenced to prison be inconveinanced
because they have to travel further to see them?Really, isn't
the blame solely on the inmate for making a foolish decsion?
If the devolpers what that land, let THEM build a the new prison first - THENThey can buy and develop the property.Tax
payers should not be stuck subsidizing land developers fat-cat wallets.
Sugar House park was the site of the original prison - I am glad it moved from
there and was replaced with a great public amenityIf there were a new park
in Draper I would support the move - but merely replacing it with a new downtown
15 miles south is NOT good planning
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments