Other states show that moving a prison isn't the most effective thing to do

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • freedomingood provo, Utah
    March 21, 2014 5:41 p.m.

    Conservatives will fall in line. Let's pay for a new prison even though we don't need one. Nice crony capitalism.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 20, 2014 2:43 p.m.

    This article was so well researched and stated... I was hoping the comments would be about the article, and not just the usual "Our legislators are bought and paid for" stuff. But right from the first comment we are right back in that rut.

    Esquire, "Yeah, but the legislature is owned by special interests"...

    Flashback, "The legislature is run by developers. The developers stand to cash in if the prison is moved"...

    Noodlekaboodle, "But, if we don't move the prison how will the legislator sell the land to themselves"...

    rlsintx Plano TX , "don't pawn off the move to the taxpayers for your own gain."... (do you pay Utah taxes in Texas??)


    Are Utah legislators really developers?

    Do you even know who is on the relocation committee? Do you care?

    How can they sell the land to themselves? That would be a conflict of interest. If there is a REAL conflict of interest... put it out there (not just the innuendo)

    If you have proof of your innuendos... put the proof out there for all to see! Otherwise...

    How does the legislature benefit from selling the land to the highest bidder??

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 20, 2014 11:51 a.m.

    What's with all the "VOTE THEM OUT! comments?

    Is this a political campaign... or is there a real topic to discuss here?

    I suspect that democrat legislators are just as human as republican legislators. Politicians are politicians. They are probably just as developer controlled as republican legislators... so just voting republicans out doesn't really solve the problem does it?


    There's a schism of logic going on in the critics of the plan. They complain that the legislature is making the people pay for the move, but at the same time they are complaining that they are selling the land.

    They are selling the land so less cost will be passed along to the people!

    Depending on what the highest bid for the land is... there may be NO COST to the people. The developer who buys the old land to develop it into houses, businesses, schools, parks and churches... may pay the whole cost of the move!

    Who pays the whole cost of the move IF we DON'T sell?? -- Hint.. the people --

    When you move... don't you sell your old house to help buy the new one???

  • mcclark Salt Lake City, UT
    March 19, 2014 4:38 p.m.

    All these complaints about our corrupt legislature, who are you going to vote for next time? Yeah, thats what I thought.

  • jamsenior SANTAQUIN, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:58 p.m.

    Why would you want a prison in the most populated area of the state? Why can't a new prison be built in less populated area with the idea of reform utmost in design? Redevelopment should include green space and the money needed to build a new prison comes from redevelopment. If you don't like the politicians VOTE THEM OUT!

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    March 19, 2014 1:25 p.m.

    So how would the state spending millions of dollars on land to move to a new location, when they already have perfectly good land that we(the taxpayers) own help fund programs to reduce recidivism? Look at other state institutions. When buildings at the U of U get older we don't tear them down, sell the land, and build a new college somewhere else. You just replace that building with a new one, then tear down/remodel the old one. Unless this land is worth way more than it's being appraised at this move doesn't make sense.

  • rlsintx Plano, TX
    March 19, 2014 12:05 p.m.

    If it's such a compelling argument to move the prison so development can expand in the south SL valley, let the developers pay for the move up-front. Developers buy up farms, rundown areas etc. before development. They sometimes buy out leases and move business tenants similarly. It seems pretty obvious that this is the end-game. Fine, step up and bear all the costs of making your profits developers, but don't pawn off the move to the taxpayers for your own gain.

  • erwad whoville, UT
    March 19, 2014 11:16 a.m.

    Well done Evensen. You earned this one.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    March 19, 2014 10:56 a.m.

    If other states don't see the ABSOLUTE GREATNESS of moving the prison - it must be that they don't allow real estate developers to be state legislators. The fact that legislators haven't personally benefited YET only relates to the fact that they haven't made the "deals" yet.

    "utcyclist" WHY can't "new programming and recidivism" be done at the current location? WHY can't facilities be re-built or even new ones added at the current location? There are open fields all around the prison. Your position wouldn't happen to have anything to do with the fact that you live in Draper - would it?

    The possible prison move has a very bad "smell" to it!

  • Shawnm750 West Jordan, UT
    March 19, 2014 10:44 a.m.

    I think Gov. Herbert is right. We can't simply just build a bigger prison somewhere else and expect to solve the problem. Our approach to corrections in general needs to be reevaluated, and we need to build facilities that support a new approach. Too many prisoners want out simply because they don't like being in prison, not because they see the benefit of being a contributing member of society. Finding a better way to show them why the latter is so important ought to be the focus of our reform efforts. Some of our current practices for those incarcerated do more damage than good, making people even less sociable and less capable of functioning in society.

  • utcyclist Draper, UT
    March 19, 2014 10:08 a.m.

    Prison reform and building a new facility aren't mutually exclusive, in fact they are dependent on each other. New programming to reduce recidivism require updated facilities and it simply makes no sense to do that in the current location.

    Continued accusations that the move is motivated by legislators looking to profit personally is ridiculous and unsubstantiated.

    Everyone will benefit when it moves.

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    March 19, 2014 9:37 a.m.

    Re: Flashback

    Great idea, I say that the moved prison site be made into a huge urban park, like New York's Central Park. We did it with Sugarhouse Park, we should do it again.

    What better legacy to leave our children, and their children!

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    March 19, 2014 9:36 a.m.

    But, if we don't move the prison how will the legislator sell the land to themselves and their friends to make a killing by building housing developments?

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    March 19, 2014 9:03 a.m.

    The legislature is run by developers. The developers stand to cash in if the prison is moved. Let's stop it right in it's track to state that the land will be developed into a large regional park featuring the hot ponds that are on site.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    March 19, 2014 8:58 a.m.

    Yeah, but the legislature is owned by special interests.

  • Northern Logan, UT
    March 19, 2014 8:10 a.m.

    It's because Cali is no longer tough on weed, and In Utah people get pulled over for putting there hair up at a stop light. It really happened look it up.

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    March 19, 2014 6:36 a.m.

    This is a well researched, and thoughtful editorial! It makes one wonder why the Utah legislature is unanimous in its support for moving the prison.

    Are our legislators so "bought and paid for" by development special interests that they haven't consisted alternatives to moving the prison?