Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Corrections topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House clears Utah Correctional Industries business park after local input changes

Utah House of Representatives · March 1, 2000
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Lawmakers considered first substitute SB 183 to allow Utah Correctional Industries to build a business park on prison property, debated local input and conflict safeguards, adopted an amendment adjusting local representation, and passed the bill unanimously in the House.

Representative Chard opened discussion on first substitute SB 183 (Utah Correctional Industries Business Park), describing the project as state property intended to create workshop and training employment for inmates. "It is state property ... its intent is to build facilities that will allow prisoners to be employed and to gain skills and to work toward reintroduction into society," Chard said.

Members discussed local concerns including zoning, Draper City representation on the five-member oversight council, and whether waste-transfer operations referenced in prior negotiations were part of the business park substitute. Representative Hogue offered an amendment to replace the Governor's appointment language with a Salt Lake County legislative-body appointment to increase local representation; the House adopted that amendment. Representative Bryson proposed an anti-conflict amendment that would limit certain Department of Corrections employees and their immediate families from holding financial positions with lessees; that amendment failed on the floor after debate about scope and possible constitutional concerns.

Following floor amendments and debate, the House passed first substitute SB 183 with a recorded 61 yes, 0 no; the bill was referred to the Senate for further action. Sponsors said the project could add 250-300 inmate jobs over five to eight years; supporters emphasized skills training and reduced recidivism potential.

Next steps: With House passage the bill returns to the Senate; implementing details (board appointments, lease terms and any conflict-of-interest rules) will be handled in rulemaking and by the overseeing board.