There are lobbyists making millions over this. Lease any property until new
prison is paid in full.
2 bits,"surplus land". The land is not surplus it is
currently being used. Our Utah legislature without a plan for where the new
prison will be, what the new prison will cost has decided to move the prison and
free up that land for development. You may not want to call it "crony
capitalism", but it sure isn't very good public policy. The
legislature has taken a jump without knowing where they are landing and they
have committed a lot of Utah taxpayer dollars to do so.
freedomingood,IF... you have some proof it's "crony
capitalism"... put that proof out there. Otherwise... just saying it
doesn't make it so.How is selling surplus land to the highest
bidder "crony capitalism"? Once we build the other facility.. this one
becomes surplus, and SHOULD be sold (to benefit the tax payers of Utah).IF you have some proof that it benefits any legislator... just put your
theory (and some proof you know some legislator who will benefit) out there..
that's all I ask.last comment...
Crony capitalism strikes again. Put it up for a popular vote Utah.
Redshirt1701,The new facility is probably going to cost more than the old
one is worth (kinda like when you sell your house and move to a bigger one).
But I think you are on the right track.Whatever we get when we sell
the old facility will help offset at least some of the cost of building the new
one.I think to prevent the possibility of there being any people
saying some legislator gave his brother in law a good deal... they need to sell
it to the highest bidder. That way if anybody thinks somebody's getting it
cheep, all they have to do is outbid them. Kinda takes the possibility of
giving a relative a sweet deal out of the equation.===Once we sell it... the developer owns it.We can't sell it....
and then pretend we still own it and can tell the developer what they can do
with it. We don't own it anymore. We can zone it, but we really need to
respect the new owner's rights of ownership and let them develop it and
sell off parts of it to make back their investment.IMO
A more simple idea is this. Sell the developers the land that the prison is on
for the same price that it will cost to build a new one. Some discounts could
be given due to the age, but you ge the idea.
I think there should be parks included in the development (and there usually
is). Developers are not interested in making it a crappy place to live. They
are already building many schools and parks in that area. But I don't
know that it ALL needs to be one huge park. That's a little extreme (all
or nothing).Maybe some parks, and some housing, and some schools,
and some businesses, and some of everything?We aren't NYC. We
don't need a central park (in the suburbs). We already have lots of parks
in our neighborhoods, and we have the canyons, and the deserts, and LOTS of open
space in every direction (which NYC doesn't have). Central Park
is great, but try to find a scrap of grass anywhere else in the city... We
aren't like NYC and I don't want to try to be like NYC.
You realize if we turn it into a huge park... you and me (Utah tax payers) get
to pay 100% of the cost of the new land and construction... right?If
we sell it (like you do when you move)... we can use the money we got from
selling the old place to buy the new place. Instead of having to come up with
100% of the cost of the new place.Selling the land to the highest
bidder is a way to reduce the costs of the move. It's been used by every
State (Democrat or Republican) and every family that moves to a new house.
It's normal finance 101.... use the equity in the old to help buy the new.
The State got this land very cheep in the 50's. It's
valuable now. Selling it may allow the move to happen without a lot of new
taxes, bonds, etc.No sell... they have to find a way to get 100% of
the cost for the move from me (and you).That's right. Instead
of getting the money from the winning bidder... 100% falls to the tax payers.
I don't want that bill.
Best idea that I've heard yet. Cudos to the letter writer.I'm still in favor of turning the whole thing into a great big regional
park featuring the ponds. That way no developers, who run the legislature,
would get a dime.