| OCR Text |
Show County Commissioner Explains Reasons For Judicial Security Blelg by Stanley D. Roberts County Commissioner Inasmuch as the citizens of Utah County are being asked to make a decision on Jan. 18 regarding the proposed bond issue affecting the construction of a new Judicial-Security Building Buil-ding and some renovation work on the present County building, I would like to express my feelings feel-ings on the project. It is the desire de-sire of the County Commission and the committee that all possible pos-sible pertinent information on the project bge supplied. The County Commission has been motivated to recommend the project on the basis of need in the followin gareas: 1. The present facilities are approximately 50 years old and have had little or no capital improvements since construction. construc-tion. It is now imperative that the heating, plumbing, ventilating ventil-ating and electrical system be updated. 2. The present buildings which house essential county functions are dispersed in several sev-eral different buildings which are grossly inadequate and temporary. tem-porary. When Provo City moves mov-es to their new complex, only token relief will be realized by the county because the main building on the corner of University Uni-versity Avenue and Center St., now housing most of the Provo City offices, is in a dilapidated condition and will be dismantled dismantl-ed by the city as soon as they vacate. 3. As has been repeated on numerous occasions, the present pres-ent jail facilities are inadequate inade-quate from the standpoint of safety for the, police officers,, security of the inmates, the difficulty in segregating the various classes of offenders and the impossibility of implement-any implement-any kind of effective rebhabil-ating rebhabil-ating program. 4. The average stay for inmates in-mates in the County Jail is less than one year, therefore, all of them with the exception or those committed to the State Prison are released to go back into society. Unless we place the proper tools and facilities in the hands of the police, the judges, juries, appointed and elected officials, and other public pub-lic agencies, about all we will be able to do is perpetuate the problems with little or no ability abil-ity to implement preventative or rehabilitative programs. Those who advocate this proposed pro-posed new development are all substantial taxpayers in the county. We will probably be paying more taxes than the average av-erage citizen, therefore, we, too are interested in keeping to a minimum the tax burden. I feel that we are close to the problems prob-lems and have a fair understanding under-standing of the needs of the county. The county is in a good sound financial position to afford af-ford the expenditure of some $4 million to be prorated over the next 15 to 20 years. This will probably be a once in a lifetime expenditure for such a need. The facility itself, of course, will not solve all of the crime or other problems, but will give every citizen an opportunity to participate in an earnest effort ef-fort by providing the ways and means drastically needed. The people of Utah County are far above average in their desire for high standards of living liv-ing and of solving their own social problems. The quality of life enjoyed in this beautiful valley is evidence of this. The per capita expense of maintaining main-taining these standards is less in Utah County than any other county in the State of Utah. I feel sincerely that the proposed facility is needed, justified and vital, and therefore enlist the support of everyone. |
