Another alternative would be to decline the prison factory plan. This would essentially shut down all of the schemes, but would curry favor with the electorate in the area, many of whom are opposed to the project. It would not address the greater issue of economic stagnation in the area. However, there is nothing to say that this particular scheme is the only option for the area, let alone the best one.
A third alternative would be to seek better options. The biggest issue for government to address is the regional economy. At present, there are no other proposals on the table, but given time one might emerge. Holding off would please opponents of the various schemes, and allow for more thorough research regarding the current option. A fourth option would be to fund the upgrades for the EMS, since that option would help bring the four county EMS up to the desired national standard, and it is more politically acceptable to finance EMS than an unprofitable prison factory and a half-baked resort development scheme. Options three and four can be combined.
5) the cost estimates for the prison option are vague. There appears to be some benefit to homeowners in the area in terms of reduced flood insurance requirements, and potentially some benefit can be attached to the lives the EMS team expects to save, but on the whole the numbers are very fuzzy. The costs of declining the prison proposal would be the lives not saved - a concern mainly to Palchaterian and only if the EMS is going to get any money anyway, which is a questionable assumption; and the economic fallout of the Polaris plant closing.
The third alternative provides an opportunity to counteract the loss of Polaris without the costs associated with this current proposal. It may take time, but this slow-moving rural area does not appear to be in a rush, with as many people opposed to development as for it. Moreover, the prison has funds set aside for it and therefore can still be used as a lynchpin for development,...
The fourth alternative saves lives, at a cost of $100,000 per year. The worst case scenario means a life costs $200,000, which is acceptable. The economy loses the Polaris jobs, but saves by avoiding the potential debacles with the resort and the prison factory.
The probability of success for the proposal is minimal, given the dubious nature of the numbers, the half-hearted resort plans, the trouble associated with selling the prison's paper to government agencies, the resistance from locals and whatever other obstacles may need to be overcome. Success would not yield sufficient benefit for this low probability to be worth the risk. The second/third option has an equally low probability of success, but the hope is that it can be done without cost. The fourth option has a good probability of success for the EMS, but has no chance of saving the economy.
6) I would recommend the fourth option. One factor to consider is the prevailing sentiment in favor of the free market. The schemes as presently constituted would require significant government involvement in the free market, for a low probability option with questionable benefits. The prison-paper-resort scheme essentially uses government funds to prop up three enterprises that are not viable on their own, and against the will of a significant portion of the local community. The fourth option gives us the ability to stay out of private enterprise issues, while saving lives at a small cost. The training can be funded, the plane is probably a luxury. However, the EMS option gives us saved lives at little cost, no resources, no risk and no political headaches.
7) to implement the plan I would funnel money towards the EMS team for a training upgrade. This can be done through channels that support health care or EMS upgrades in order to meet federally recommended service standards. The second part of the implementation would be to work with the prison to find better uses for its money.
