FreedomFighter - I love those refineries! Having them nearby keeps our gas
prices lower. We are very lucky to have them since extreme regulations make it
almost impossible to build new refineries.
A college there is better than another strip mall and a build a bear where
maximum Security was located. Any developer must pay the cost to tear in down
and not be related to a legislator.
This is a no brainer. We have a 60 year old prison which we can raise and sell
the land for top dollar, plus we get to tax the new homes and businesses built
on the land. We can place the prison on much cheaper land the same distance
from downtown Salt Lake City just out west.
A great location for a new State fairgrounds.
What a joke, the "rosie" picture is nothing but a pipe dream. It will
never happen. The tax payers of this fine state will be the ones who have to
pay for this pie-in-the-sky mess. Thank you legislature!
Skull Valley is a nice area. The Indian Nation would welcome the jobs and Utah
could dump more of their junk on their land. At least they would make some money
from it. Remember Utah owns all their mineral rights and gave them nothing in
I don't think this editorial makes the case the moving the prison is
essential to creating a high tech industry. These are two different issues and
should be looked at separately.
@ Mike JohnsonA better location for another university would be at
the north end of the valley at the site of the dirty refineries.
This proposal, in the works for several years now, is not about creating
shopping or entertainment districts. It is about advanced technology and
development. The southern part of the Salt Lake valley needs a university. A
university fits into the burgeoning high tech corridor under development.
"Point of the Mountain University" (or "Salt Lake Valley
University" or "Utah Mountain University") would complement the
University of Utah, Utah Valley University, and Brigham Young University (and
Salt Lake Community College and Mountainland Applied Technology College), in
this regard. The infrastructure is there for a university. It would integrate
well into the high tech corridor. Sure, it may not happen, but it fits a lot
better than everything else mentioned in the comments here as likely to
happen.Note, Utah's high tech corridor is one of about two
dozen very important high tech centers in the US. The most important, of course,
is Silicon Valley in California. The Dulles Technology Corridor, here in
Virginia, is also important, as are Research Triangle in North Carolina, Silicon
Hills around Austin Texas, and the Denver Tech Center. Utah's is growing
and will lead Utah's economy for the next century or more.
I am in the construction industry. It is laughable to say the state can not
rebuild on the current site. What about the inmates they say? Leave them there.
I have been on projects where we have expanded jails and prisons with less space
and the inmates were never moved.This is all about making select
people rich at the expense of the public.
re LDS Liberal"If this truly such a "good idea". Let
THEM build the New Prison - at their expense - first."It'll
never work because that isn't the standard MLM/Free Market way here in
From the beginning, the land has been valued at only about a sixth of the cost
of building a new prison. The developer friends of our Republican
legislators will do extremely well out of this deal. Utah taxpayers will be
sheared but then thoughtlessly re-elect the shearers just because they have an
(R) next to their names.
Social the risk, privatize the profits.
denied? Seriously?Look, Land Developers are constantly looking
for a "good" deal.If this truly such a "good
idea".Let THEM build the New Prison - at their expense - first.After that -- THEN we can discuss what to do about the old
Prison.If it is still truly such a "good" idea, They'd still be willing to go for it.Other wise, it's only a "good" idea ONLY because Tax-payers are helping THEM.
DN says there's nothing inevitable about moving the prison. The DN is
wrong. There is far to much money to be made by developers, consultants,
lawyers, accountants, and financiers on both ends of the deal -- developing the
current site and acquiring a new site and building a new prison. Note that I
have not included the general tax-paying public as beneficiaries. The move will
probably happen now but if not then soon -- five to seven years. And it will be
done as most such large projects are done in most places -- socialize the costs,
privatize the profits.
@ high school fan"Sounds like a nice slogan but you have nothing
to back it up. It really just sounds like you jump to conclusions rather than
study an issue."This isn't rocket science. Who do you think
is behind this? And who do you think is going to pay the $1 billion cost to
relocate?Tax payers are forced to socialize the costs.Rich
land owners get to privatize the profits.It's that simple.
I can't believe the Deseret News is shilling for this -- IMO --They
have got it 180 degrees backwards.Land Developers are supposed to
know a good deal when they see it.So -- If this is such
a fine, fantastic, and GOOD idea -- Let the "Land Developers"
build the New Prison - First - and at THEIR expense.Then, we can all
sit down and talk about what to do with the OLD prison.Me thinks -
as greedy businessmen - they see an opportunity to fleece the tax-payers
--- AGAIN!The Deseret News should be ashamed of this...
It's interesting our legislators ignored every report over the last decade
showing that moving the prison would cost more than leaving it where it is.
But, the developers have been persistent - with an effective PR campaign and
putting political contributions into the right hands.
On reading the title, I thought it sounds nice in theory but in reality...
Freedom fighter hit the nail on the head. This is Utah where the
most vocal lobby is real estate developers or did everyone forget the recent
articles about 1) how Urban Utah is & 2) the problems associated w/ the
sprawl.Mike J has a good idea but it will never happen. It
won't surprise in the least to see a big sports complex like in KC or
Dallas that can be used by the Utes, cougars, jazz, & Bees with the thoughts
of luring an MLB or NFL team. But, it would not be complete w/o a... you guessed
it... enormous, massive, sprawling, shopping/entertainment district.
What this editorial failed to mention is that the original Sugarhouse location
was way too small and the prison had no room to expand. In Draper, there is
plenty of room for prison expansion and rebuilds of some structures (not all
need to be updated). Unlike the Sugarhouse situation, this one is motivated
entirely by land speculation and the desire for taxpayers to foot the bill. The
Draper-based Utah Taxpayer Association has been very quiet about this whole
boondoggle when they are usually the first to beat the drums anytime taxpayers
have to spend a drop more money on anything. Apparently, the Utah Taxpayer
Association really doesn't care about the residential taxpayer. They care
about the businesses that will get to develop $70 million worth of land at the
cost of $1 billion+ to taxpayers. I don't know about you, but when someone
says give me 100 dollars and I will give you back 7 dollars and tries to
convince me its a good deal, I will say no. But for some reason, people are so
partisan that they are conditioned to believe in this type of reasoning without
giving it a moments thought.
Follow the money.Of course, we will only be able to follow a huge
flood of tax dollars spent to relocate the prison. The huge amounts wasted on
transportation of prisoners back and forth for court matters and medical
treatment, and massive drops in volunteer support and family visits which aid in
the rehabilitation of the small number of prisoners who can be rehabilitated.We will not see the corporate profits from turning over prime real
estate, the hefty consulting fees, lots of legal fees, developer profits and the
like.Just look at some of the shenanigans that took place with the
development of TRAX and light rail for cautionary tales of what might (hah!) be
in store for us with the prison relocation.So far, the only numbers
that make good sense, or profits, are for the developers, not for the
taxpayers.Leave the prison where it is, and let the silicon slippery
slopers build their campus on private land. I understand Robert Redford has a
nice area that is pretty much undeveloped.
It would be nice to have the state auditor do a study to lets us know what the
true costs of the move will be. I won't hold my breath.
Freedom fighterSounds like a nice slogan but you have nothing to back it
up. It really just sounds like you jump to conclusions rather than study an
issue.The article stated that much has to be done but you seem to have the
answers even before they do. I favor moving it simply because the facility
needs a complete rebuilding and I have found it cheaper to start fresh rather
than try to remodel. And if you must rebuild, there are better places to do so.
The "momentum" for moving the prison was self-induced by those who want
to enrich themselves at the public's expense. Rebuild what is
needed on site, there is room. I have no confidence in this scheme
to move the prison "out of the way" of developers. It will cost the
state more than is mentioned - Murphy's Law on steroids. The National
economy is not that hot, and will not be for a long while until Washington, both
parties, get their act together.If the recommendation is to keep the
prison on the Wasatch Front, where is there enough room besides the present
location? If there is such a place, build Silicon Slopes there, and save the
effort to move the prison. We have telecommuting, Freeways going north and
south, east and west to service the utopian dream of developers.This
is not a good idea.Me thinks the editorial board got this one wrong.
I would like to see the complex converted into a college or university.
The tax payers foot the bill.The rich land developers privatize the