|
Post by Swimmy on Jan 24, 2008 8:41:08 GMT -5
Alternate jail sites soughtWhy doesn't the state just come in and condemn some land, construct the prison and pat itself on the back for a job well done? What's wrong with expanding the current facility to meet the state's mandate? I haven't fully followed this story from the beginning so I'm probably not aware of some facts.
|
|
|
Post by froggy on Jan 24, 2008 9:55:29 GMT -5
The county is dragging this out longer than it has to be, period. The current jail sucks. There is no room to really expand it other than upward, and the state has taken issue with the structure already. The county should have had multiple sites in mind all along even when the Burrell/Farber Lane site seemed like the one they wanted. Gotta have a contingency plan, and now they are back to square one. Sooner or later the state is going to step in and act on this themselves and it is going to cost us taxpayers in the end more than just a new jail. The Duofold site in Ilion, while seems good because it once had utilities and such, is bad because Remington Elementary school is just a few blocks away. Residents will fight that. The Putts Hill site, I know the road but not the exact site, is up out of the way, so opposition to that would be minimal. But because of the remoteness, getting sewer and water there might also pose problems as the Rt 28 site that is all but dead now.
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jan 24, 2008 10:27:38 GMT -5
Froggy, had the county not already purchased the land on Farber Lane? I lost track of the issue to an extent. I don't live there, but it seems from my familiarity with the area, that it was a suitable site, with limited impact.
If they wait for someone to stand up and say the WANT a jail in their side yard, it will never get built. It seems like it was a typical dirty political move to refuse service to the site.
I guess it will drag on until the costs have risen, and enough has been spent on the infighting and site studies to have paid for a pretty substantial portion of the construction costs. I say go a head and put it on farber lane. The state should step in and pressure the politicians in Herkimer to supply the services. I am sure pressure could be brought to bear on them.
The issue is not one that will be making everyone happy. At least on Farber Lane, there are only a few houses and few neighbors to complain and be dissatisfied. I would not want to be one of them, but it is a fact.
In order to consider that factor, they will have to sacrifice some other factor, such as accessibility, or convenience, or central location.
Let's face it, there are no boondocks in the portion of Herkimer County where they seem to want to put the jail. It has to be near someone or something.
|
|
|
Post by froggy on Jan 24, 2008 11:00:21 GMT -5
No, they had a purchase agreement in place for the site on Rt 28, commonly referred to as the Farber lane site or the Burrell property. They didn't actually buy the property though, as they couldn't without the appropriate impact studies done. There were contingencies in place with that purchase agreement that would make it null and void for certain reasons, and suffice to say not being able to get sewer and water service probably kills the deal.
While it does seem like dirty politics for the village to not supply water and sewer, I have to ask the question why it took so long to disclose that? I mean the Rt 28 site was brought up and voted on this time last year, so why now is the village finally coming out and saying "oh by the way we aren't running water and sewer out there"? This conversation could have taken place close to a year ago and the county would have been exploring other options. Instead, another has gone by of wasted time.
But dirty politics or not, its not much different than what Frankfort has done with the pumpkin patch site. The town will not start water and sewer construction at the PP until the county is set with a jail site, for fears that they will build it on the PP. So, what you now have is a vacant lot on the south east corner off Rt 5S that cannot become shovel ready until the county makes their move, and yet there is state grant money slated for the town of Frankfort to begin water and sewer construction to get it shovel ready for economic growth. Did you follow all that? See this is how growth is stiffled, because way too many issues are intertwined that really have no business with each other. Imagine this summary, we can't bring businesses and jobs here because we can't figure out where to build a jail. ?
Yes, ultimately it has to be near someone or something. There is no getting around that. Consider that the county doesn't seem to be exploring properties that it already owns. What happens to the RT 28 property if it becomes a jail? It is no longer taxable property. Property that the county already owns isn't on the tax rolls to begin with and should be the first option for a site.
I hope that sooner or later the state will step in and force the legislature to pick a site, or pick it for them. Its dragged on long enough.
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jan 24, 2008 11:25:00 GMT -5
I agree with ya Froggy about the pumpkin patch site. I think personally that it would be an excellent site. People have said the weather and whiteouts and closing 5S during storms would preclude it, but that is BS.
Any site they pick is going to have supporters and detractors. It is a case of the least impact and least detriment to the area in question. I hope someone steps in and makes a decision to force Herkimer to provide service and to use the Farber Lane site. The state might even pay for the extension of the lines and services, if it came down to it. An extension of services to that area would benefit others also and not only the jail.
Oh well. I don't live there, so my opinion is strictly that, an opinion from a disinterested party.
|
|
|
Post by froggy on Jan 24, 2008 11:48:09 GMT -5
I don't think the Farber lane site is too bad, but I don't think taking about 28 acres off the tax rolls is a smart idea either.
|
|
|
Post by froggy on Jan 24, 2008 15:39:15 GMT -5
Oh well. I don't live there, so my opinion is strictly that, an opinion from a disinterested party. That's fine, but depending on where you do live, it could have an impact. I was debating issues regarding the Oneida County Sheriff's office over at the other forum recently. At one time, one member dismissed any of my opinions and concerns based on the fact that I live in Herkimer Co. Well, considering that I work in Oneida county roughly 11 hours a day, 5 days a week, it impacts me. Considering I have family still living in Oneida co, it impacts me. Considering I shop and pay taxes in Oneida co, it impacts me. Topics are all relative, you see. While you may not live here in NY, clipper, you probably still have family here, so in some regard it impacts you. Now, one point I also tried to tie in to validate my entitlement to opinions on Oneida co was the aforementioned Herkimer Co jail issue. Well how are the two issues related? Simple economics. Part of the reason why Herkimer Co needs a new jail is that ours is too small and they board out many to, you guessed it, Oneida co. So, when Herkimer Co gets their act straight and finally builds it, it is a revenue stream Oneida county will lose. Funny how issues are related even when they appear not to be.
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jan 24, 2008 15:52:56 GMT -5
The jail situation and boarding of prisoners is a head scratcher. Here in Tennessee, we have overcrowding in jails. That forces counties to board prisoners in other counties and pay for their confinement. At the same time, the jails are full of state inmates and they receive money for confining those people. Many times here, a criminal is convicted and sentenced to a term in a state prison. The problem is there is no room for him, so we have murderers and other convicted inmates serving long sentences in a county jail, not secure enough or intended to provide the level of security needed for safe incarceration of these dangerous offenders.
They have however, been successful in building "regional jails"shared by a geographical area and several counties. That has worked well and saved everyone money while providing a much better facility and more beds. That is not able to be done there due to state mandates, but it should be changed on the state level. Anyone serving more than 30 days would be taken from the smaller jails to the regional jail, and anyone sentenced to more than a year would go to state prison.
It sometimes takes over a year to transfer an inmate to a state facility, and if the offense is not a crime of violence, he may not be transferred even then.
|
|