We could spruce the prison up very nicely for far less than a half billion
bucks. I suggest we disappoint the developers.
I don't think it matters whether it is moved or not as long as the taxpayer
don't get to foot the bill -- If as some have indicated,developers only
want to get rich off of it let them give a binding proposal with a bid bond to
to cover the removal and building of the new prison.If they don't make it
happen the bonding company will have to finish it.Too often deals like this the
principles are not held accountable for cost over runs and the taxpayer ends up
holding the bag.I don't care how much money a developer makes on a project
if it don't end up costing the taxpayer and we accomplish the goal we have
set.However any developer has to take his chances so he better know what he is
doing and not figure he can rely on the taxpayer to bail him out.
The previous commentors are dead on -- this is a done deal to benefit developers
and the politically powerful and influential.Socialize the costs --
privatize the profits
This mover has never been about building a better facility or the state being
able to profit from relocating the facility. Two separate assessors have said
that relocating the prison would cost far more than what the state would make
from selling the land. Long-term (and I mean REALLY long-term) the state might
make the money back in taxes, but those who stand to make the most are the
developers. And guess who some of the primary board members/legislators sitting
on this committee are? Real estate developers. I concede that the facility is
old and either needs to be improved or replaced. But let's not fly it under
the banner of some false notion of "making more money from the land" for
the state. At the end of the day, even if the facility is relocated, we're
still going to have the cost of operating the facility on top of the costs
associated with its relocation (which was estimated at around $500 million...)
The value of the property it currently sits on was valued a less than $100
million. I think it's obvious where the interests lie here...
Follow the money! Who owns the surrounding land? Who would make the most by
seeing the prison moved.
It should be required if the prison is moved. That the land be used as a park.
That way we can be sure, that moving the prison was done for the right reasons,
and not as a pay back to the campaign donations, the politicians who are making
the decision, received.
"New prison relocation effort begins with a question: Does a move make
sense?"-------------I strongly suspect that it only
makes sense if one is able to determine who is most likely to gain from the use
of the current property. Most likely some well-connected land developers.
Does a move make cents?To the real estate lobby firmly entrenched in
Utah Government at the highest levels, the answer is a resounding YES!
Don't move it. Who cares if it looks run down or outdated. Fix what needs
to be fixed. After all, it's a prison. It shouldn't look like a
place you would want to go to.
Believe me, folks, this is a done deal.