Here's a thought, why not delay a vote until you have published the report
for the public to read and study and then run on your announced vote for or
against the measure.As this will involve significant effort, funding
and funds changing hands, we could include it as a separate vote in this
election cycle. It's a unique idea, public approval of spending money.Voting on an unread unstudied proposal is how Congress gave us the Farm
Bill, ACA and almost all out laws. This proposal has boondoggle
written all over it.IMO the legislature can and ought to do
better.There isn't a tooth fairy, nor a pot of gold at the end
of the rainbow, and I believe there isn't a silicon corridor around Point
of the Mountain.
This is such a good deal, and won't cost taxpayers anything?Well, it will cost $102 million, but to politicians, that is the same as
nothing, since it is not their money.How about if all the
politicians who vote for a move sign up to pay for that $102 million out of
THEIR money, not ours!This whole scheme still stinks, and the
unintended consequences and COSTS will be huge, but not revealed until it is too
late to turn back.We should also demand full disclosure of the name
of EVERY person who ever makes a dollar off this scheme. Following the money is
always a good investigative tool, and we should know who is doing this to line
their own pockets, and who may just honestly believe it is a good long term move
for the state, corrections department, judicial system, and inmates and their
families.Vote NO! on the move until we know how and why the
TAXPAYERS will benefit more than the real estate speculators and politicians.
Growing up in Utah most of my life. Everytime my family drove by the prison it
was a reminder of the importance of doing what is right. Or seeing the reality
of poor decisions. I think having a prison in plain sight can be of value for
everybody in society. To be able to see the reality of bad decisions and
importance of obeying the law. Just my thought on keeping it where
I am sure they are all innocent, just let them go, seriously, how about more
Are some people missing the point that it is going to cost basically just as
much money to leave the prison right where it is?If it is moved, at least
the state can sell the land it is currently on and recoup some of the cost.
The prison requires so many repairs and upgrades due to the simple fact that it
has aged. When you aggregate the value of the land and cost of repairs against
moving it to lower cost and less desirable real estate it seems like a big win
for the state. Have the Legislative auditors and various non political state
employees evaluate bids to ensure that it is apolitical.
Double or triple the $102 million. No one ever sold a legislature on a program
without taking an optimistic view. Add in the cost overruns, upgrades, inflation
and kick-backs and this is going to cost the public a lot more.Yes,
the land is valuable because it is conveniently located. Why shouldn't the
citizens of Utah be the ones to benefit from that convenience? Leave it there.
Why isn't anyone talking about the principle of the thing?Why
should we the taxpayers pay to move a prison while real estate cronies with
connections to our government make off with bundles of money?I
thought utahns cared about morality? To me, moving the prison at taxpayer
expense while enriching a select handful isn't moral.
Consider the thousands of people who currently volunteer their service at the
prison—If it is moved to a remote location, the prisoner rehabilitation
rate will decline in direct correlation to the distance volunteers will have to
Too many of our legislators have a conflict of interest in this matter. They
want to slow it down to find aways around the conflicts so their companies can
profit on the move.
"Dee said waiting until the next legislative session a year from now to
endorse a move wouldn't be "fair to the public or to the people who
have been working on it."To the people who have been
"working on it!?"They can wait. They've been well-paid
for their efforts. We aren't rushing into an expensive public decision to
appease "who have been working on it."
The prison as a whole isn't old. A couple of the buildings are old but the
majority of the buildings were built in the mid 80s to early 90s, the newest
housing facility was completed in 2000. Those that stand to make a bunch of
money on this keep pointing to the oldest building to draw you attention away
from the new ones that still have a lot of years left in them.While
driving south on I15 as you fist see buildings after going under the Bangerter
overpass look at those buildings. Do they look old? Of course not, they
aren't. The State will not make a ton of cash since they'll give huge
tax breaks to whoever buys the land eliminating the optimistic projections of
tax revenue and the cost of rebuilding will always be over the projected amount.
The legislature plans to read the proposal before making a decision? That was
the best part of the article.
Those who benefit by drivng cars pay the gasoline tax.Let the
developers who will benefit foot the $102 million .How can they say
the net cost will be $102 million when they have not identified the new prison
location? Does it already have the infrastructure in place or will it require
new roads, new electrical installations, new water and sewer upgrades to the new
site?Seems to be way to early in the process to make decisons.
Perhaps the legislators are hesitant to act too quickly before they can get in
on the action or at least get campaign donations from the people and firms who
will benefit from the relocation. Consider requiring a little more disclosure
on what firms have been involved behind the scenes.
move the refineries out of the salt lake basin, not the prison.
The prison relocation has the potential to be one of the greatest boondoggles in
Utah's history. The cost multipliers for the move include,retention of
prison staff,relocation of inmates,water,access to prisoners by
family,social workers and clergy. It seems that certain businesses and
individuals want this in the worst way and that may be the reason to not move it
at all. The projected benefits may not even materialize but the costs could
easily skyrocket. It should be carefully analyzed and even postponed if
questions aren't completely answered. The possibility of cost overruns in
construction, litigation,meeting EPA, and OSHA rules could really drive the
If Utah really wants to ease overcrowding they could take a second look at
prison sentences of those who have already been in for say 10 or 15 years or
longer. I know one person who received two life sentences for a crime which
would have only received a single life sentence in surrounding states. New
Mexico has six laws to help prisoners to get out of prison faster if they are
complying with certain requirements. It seems also that certain employers are
benefiting from prisoner labor more than victims of the prisoners' crimes
are. I decline to name names at this time, as I feel it should be looked at on
an individual basis. If the land developers want to make a profit off the land,
they should be required to set aside a portion of those profits to pay for the