It's not that the capital's creaky cop shop doesn't need replacing, he said. It's that the bond is bloated with too many projects.

"I want to see these facilities financed and constructed," Anderson said. "But I don't think this is the best way to proceed."

The mayor's opposition - surfacing four days before Tuesday's election - breaks months of relative silence in which Anderson has expressed support for improved police and fire facilities, but taken no official position on the bond.

He even allowed this statement to appear on a pro-Proposition 1 brochure touted by his police and fire chiefs:

''Our resources and facilities are stretched to the breaking point, particularly in emergency situations,'' the flier quoted Anderson as saying. "Our need for improved facilities is dramatic and urgent."

The mayor insists he hasn't flip-flopped - the capital's public-safety buildings are outdated and inadequate - but argued this bond bundles too much together.

Not only would it replace police and fire headquarters, but it also would pay for a bigger west-side fire station and training facility, an east-side public-safety precinct and an emergency-operations center. The cost to city taxpayers: an additional $175 a year on a $297,000 home.

While those costs would be scrutinized - and potentially reduced, bond backers and City Council members say - by a city-formed advisory committee, Anderson says he cannot support the measure.

"To say, let's have everyone vote on this incredibly large bond and then decide what the amount is going to be is rather backward," he said.

Anderson's potential successors, Ralph Becker and Dave Buhler, back the bond, but both hope the price tag can be scaled back.

Pat Shea, founder of the pro-Proposition 1 coalition SAFE, said Anderson simply is "rattling his sword" before leaving office.

Shea challenged the mayor's suggestion that the bond is better broken into pieces, saying it would cost more and accomplish less than an integrated plan.

"If you are going to build a printing press, you don't just build letters A through F," he said. "Public safety requires a full alphabet of safety buildings and personnel to make sure we can withstand catastrophes and everyday emergencies."

Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank - who had heard rumblings of Anderson's opposition - stood behind the bond Friday as "one of the most important things we can accomplish for public safety in the valley over the next 20 to 30 years.''

The east side needs a permanent police presence, he said. The west side needs a new fire station. And the half-century-old headquarters downtown now squeezes 600 employees into a space intended for less than 300.

Is it expensive? You bet, Burbank said, but it also is "essential" for a city that has allowed police and fire facilities to languish for decades.

Salt Lake County Councilman Joe Hatch - who has protested the public-safety measure as overly plump - applauded Anderson's election-eve surprise.

"Of course he came to that conclusion," he said.

Hatch hopes Anderson's comments are enough to scuttle the bond Tuesday. Then work can begin on a better one - maybe to pitch as soon as February's presidential primary.

"Let's get a good bond on the ballot," he said, "and do it as fast as we can."

jstettler@sltrib.com

What would it cost you?

* The proposed $192M public-safety bond would cost Salt Lake City taxpayers about $175 more a year on a $297,000 home.