You see, Martin seems to be under the impression that the area west of I-15 has streets made out of gold and that his east bench community is suffering because these petulant children refuse to pay an incie-wincy $2.3 million to improve North Temple for the upcoming TRAX line – “improvements” that are standard on almost 90 percent of the current system in Salt Lake City proper – “improvements” that the whole city, county, state, and even every American, paid for.

But this time around specific residents are being approached by the city to pony up. This, despite the fact that this line, more than any other, will benefit the city. The Airport line literally connects UTA and the Wasatch Front to the rest of the world and would be the first thing many visitors will see when entering the city, but now we decide to be stingy.

I really do understand that the city is in a cash crunch, but we are seeing several examples of how rails equate to growth and growth, obviously, equates to higher revenues. Now, more than ever, the city needs to invest in the future of the western half of its population, yet the council seems hesitant to do on the west side what it has been so eager to do on the east side for years.

The anger that Councilmember Martin showed just proves that the east side fundamentally does not understand the west side and its issues. Year after year the west side gets overlooked because of more ”sexy” projects on the east. The one time west siders dare to raise their head and complain, Councilmembers cry foul and complain that they are being ignored. Indeed, Councilwoman Remington-Love added to this feeling by pointing out that multiple east-side projects were put on hold for the North Temple project. Almost as if the council begrudgingly gave up their pet projects and they are appalled that the citizens on the west side citizens would be upset at having to pay a special fee that no other community had to pay.

 I support mass transit, and I support the TRAX line to the Airport, and I even support paying a tax to pay for these projects, but it is fundamentally unfair for the businesses along to pay an additional $110 per foot of property on North Temple every year for the privilege of having a service that no other property owner has to incur.

The council has done a great job of adding insult to injury by acting as though their districts are the ones that are being ignored. Year after year the west side has improvements that go by the wayside as east siders flex their political muscle, and year after year animosity grows. It is one thing to have this feeling come from the citizens, but it is quite another for civic leaders to enforce this idea. Mayor Becker, I feel, has worked to reverse this trend, but much more work clearly needs to be done.

That is a picture of a parking stall that should have contained this type of car in our apartment complex:

That car is known as a Buick Rainier, and the one owned by MRF is pleasantly known as “Cheney,” yes, as in Dick Cheney.

Cheney was driven by MRF to a Honk and Wave for Tim Bridgewater yesterday…this honk and wave:

That Honk and wave took place on North Temple and State Street in Salt Lake City. That is right here:

Funny story, that parking stall lives here, along with MRF and myself at 200 East and South Temple:

Now, some of you more observant readers may have noticed that our home, the parking stall, and the honk and wave are two city blocks away…

MRF drove her car two blocks to go to a Republican honk and wave.

…

Just felt the world needed to know.

P.S. This is my car:

For those of you who don’t know, the enacting clause is the portion of any bill that basically says that it is a law if passed, specifically it says “be it enacted by the Legislature of the state of Utah.” If it is removed, it means that it is not enacted and is not, therefore, a law. To have an enacting clause struck is, quite possibly, one of the most dishonorable ways to kill a bill, as it is worse than just not voting on it – having the clause struck it is sort of like the legislature saying to the bill sponsor “we don’t like this idea so much, we are going to spend extra time just to kill it.”

Thankfully, Senator Robles is back with SB 117 – Pete Suazo Memorial Highway. The bill, again, would make Redwood road (from 2100 South to 1700 North officially the Pete Suazo Memorial Highway (see below).

I went to school with the Suazo children, and I remember how vivid the events of his tragic death were to the west side – a strong and passionate leader was removed from us so quickly.  Senator Suazo was the first Hispanic legislator and was a great inspiration to those who often felt disenfranchised – he truly represented what government could and should be about.

I hope this bill passes, it has already made it out of the Senate at the time of writing, and I hope it makes it to the Governors desk.

Click here to contact Senator Robles.

Well, it is back, and this time it is an even stronger bill than before. To recap from last year, the bill would allow the collection and storage of rainwater either above or below ground without having to receive a water rights permit. This bill has been modified from last year to allow the storage only up to 2,500 gallons in underground containers or above ground in 55 gallon containers above ground (addressing the concerns of agriculture).

As I said last year, this bill is beneficial to urban areas where rain and snow would normally just flow down the drain and be wasted.  By capturing it and using it on, say, cooling systems, rooftop gardens, and irrigation, the water would not need to come from reservoirs miles away from the source – saving both energy and reserves by not having to pump as much during dry times.

Finally, I hope this bill will pass as it did get the recommendation of the State Water Development Commission – showing that this is a practical solution to Utah’s water needs.

Click here to contact Senator Jenkins.

Now, I must admit that I originally supported this bill when I first wrote about it, however I received an email from my friend Deb Henry over at the aptly named Hey Deb Henry (who also happens to work for UDOT) that this bill actually goes counter to UDOT’s plan for the lane.

In my original post, I basically said that our carpool lanes are a joke, and indeed, I still feel that they do. But UDOT is addressing this through some innovative plans that take advantage of modern technology. Take a look by clicking here since UDOT is dumb and won’t allow me to embed videos.

For those of you thinking I am rickrolling you, just know that the video talks about how UDOT has a plan to implement variable tolls in four zones across I-15. Now, although I understand that there is a chance for cheaters, the video does address how law enforcement can monitor activity on the toll road while still giving emphasis to carpoolers. Plus, lets not pretend that there are not already cheaters now. I do say that this bill should go further in increasing the fine for carpool lane/toll road violations…but that is another story.

Henry also point out to me that this bill would create extra trips because drivers would normally have to deal with congestion.  Now I don’t fully agree with that argument as I suspect people would just delay their trip, but even that would reduce emissions as people would not have to be in as much stop and go traffic.

In the end, I my original post that none of you saw should serve as a message to many legislators – don’t be afraid to change your opinion when you get more information.

Click here to contact Senator Morgan.

This is where Representative Carol Spackman-Moss’ (D-Salt Lake, District 37)  HB 91 comes into play.  The bill basically allows bicycle riders the right to blow through intersections when no other cars are there. No having to legally wait for the light to change in a downtown commute, no need to stop in a residential area with a stop sign, no riders can simply keep on riding, provided it is safe for them to do so.

We all know that riding a bike adds time to your commute, a top speed of 15 miles per hour or so will do that to you.  But in an urban environment where your average speed may be 15 miles per hour anyway because of traffic lights, there is an added benefit to take the train with your bike in tow and ride around downtown rather than have to hassle with traffic and parking. Plus, this bill will get more cars off the road for the rest of us!

This bill really is a win-win.  I doubt there will be an increase in accidents as it is incumbent on the rider to look for traffic, not the driver of an automobile.  And I am sure bicycle riders are already acutely aware of the hazards of the road. We make our cities more bicycle friendly and we get more cars off the road.

Click here to contact Representative Spackman-Moss

7:14 – Salt lake has a great responsibility to not only the city, but also the region and it is hoped that the 2010 will continue to be the “centerpiece of the region”

7:15 – The city must focus on the environment, efficiency , equality and engagement.

• Environment: Our air quality is unacceptable, downtown streetcars and to Davis County. We have wonderful natural resources.  Half of the energy in Salt Lake is used by commercial buildings and we have funds from federal sources to increase efficiency. The city too has made efforts to reduce its carbon footprint. Glass recycling is going to take place in downtown businesses and new LED street lights will save energy and maintenance costs for the cities 15,000 street lights – this is just one of many new efforts.
• Efficiency: City services have become more open through online website usage with real time access to the planning process (as an example). Macy’s and Nordstroms used this, and they did not need to print massive blueprints and fly them in – it saved them both time and money and it is a sign of Salt Lakes progressive future. The city has been able to cut 6.2% percent of its budget without ever loosing a single job, all because of its gains in efficiency.
• Equality: a cities livability can be defined by its ability for its citizens to have opportunities for success. Work has been done to reach out to the Salt Lake City School District to ensure that all of Salt Lake’s school children to succeed. We have also made efforts to improve the lives of those who are experiences homelessness. The Office of Diversity and Human Rights were responsible for the passage of a nondiscrimination ordinance, and this year they will launch the Mayor’s human rights campaign to educate employers about the new laws. The city is also working aggressively to ensure that all citizens of the city are counted fairly through the census.
• Engagement: We are growing our downtown though the arts and culture of the Leonardo as well as a world class theater. Downtown is filling with life as City Creek expands with a “soon to be announced” tenet. Many companies are thriving because of the efforts of the city to brand itself as a Western distribution hub. Local businesses are not forgotten, however, as efforts have been made to expand business in local neighborhood businesses. Furthermore crime is down and accidents with injuries are down, and the city has been engaging with the county and state to plan for the inevitable “big” earthquake.

A year ago, the city launched an open government initiative, and the city is continually working to improve this process – as demonstrated by the public safety building. The change in the 2 bar per block law is also proof of this, as a bill was drafted and passed into law with no objections from the council.

7:48 – Livability is the main theme, and the work on North Temple is proof of this. The city will improve sidewalks, expand bike lanes, ground power lines, add green space, and improve business and residential access. the new project is now known as the  The capitol city boulevard project on North Temple.

7:51 – Over the past two years, Mayor Becker has worked hard to ensure that “Blueprint Man” is fulfilling its goals, and as he enters the second half of his first term, there are many campaign promises kept and much more work still to be done. He will be calling on the leaders and residents of the city and state to recognize the disproportionate number of residents the city serves. The city is a capitol city, a economic hub, and a cultural center – and tax revenues from outside sources should reflect this reality.

7:54 – Other cities have inquired about the nondiscrimination ordinance and how they too can implement it. The city must lead with the emphasis on livability, if only because that is where the new world economy is headed.

7:55 – Mayor Becker calls on all citizens to support him in this process.

Analysis coming soon.

Today marks the tenth anniversary of the Salt Lake-Sandy line of Trax and it is interesting what a difference a decade makes.

This time ten years ago, the average price for a gallon of gas in the US was $1.46, adjusted for inflation and you are looking at $1.94 in today’s dollars. At the time people naysayed the high price of a round trip ticket at $2.00 that would only succeed at going from one mall to the next. Today a $4.00 round trip ticket means you don’t have to hassle with parking downtown while the price of gas makes mass transit far more appealing.  Furthermore, cities across the Wasatch Front now clamor for lines in their neighborhoods and the system is only scheduled to grow.

In short, Trax is a case study in smart planning and successful public works projects. The system carries an average of 11 million people a year with daily ridership hovering around 40-50,000.  Assuming these are all round trips, that is 20-25,000 cars not on the road, allowing our freeways to last longer for those of us who can’t yet use the system to meet their needs. These same “non-cars” also improve our lackluster air quality…just imagine what our inversions would be like with that much more smog being pumped into the air daily.

And then there is the economic impact. As you go up and down the transit corridor, it is plain to see transit oriented housing and businesses springing up everywhere. Sandy, South Salt Lake, and Murray have seen dramatic growth around their stations as people learn to live, work, and play around rails.

Those who tend to poo-poo mass transit often forget these subtle, but long term, benefits. True, the $312 million (nearly $400 million in today’s dollars) investment was a tough pill to swallow, however the overall improvements to our infrastructure and health speak for themselves.

The simple fact of the matter is that mass transit needs to become more and more a part of our everyday life.  It has been less than 65 years since trolley cars crisscrossed the city, only to be replaced by then cheaper cars.  Now it is safe to say that the cost of oil will only rise over the years and make motorized transport much more expensive. By investing now, we are reducing the impact of a world with $5,6,7, even $10 a gallon gas.

So happy birthday Trax, I recall the first time I used you that cold December afternoon and I will be revisiting you tonight as I board at Murray Central and head Downtown to enjoy the symphony, sushi with friends, and the lights.

But, in what is rapidly becoming the most contentious race in the Salt Lake Valley, the Avenues is seeing no less than five contenders vie for a spot on Salt Lake City’s Council. Their first major hurdle, however, is surviving next Tuesdays primary election – whittling the field down to two candidates.

With traditionally less than five percent of registered voters actually participating in the election, each candidate is working hard to shake as many hands as they can in the traditionally Democratic district.

Here is a breakdown of the candidates to assist those in the Capitol Hill, Marmalade, and Avenues districts towards their decision.

Edward James Aho has done little visible campaigning and, having spent less than $100 on his race, it is safe to say that Aho is not trying all that hard to win.

Lisa Allcott (lisaforcitycouncil.com) was the original front runner as she was the only one running in the race against sitting councilmember Eric Jergensen. Having been on the ground the longest has given her the advantage of name recognition. She has netted impressive Democratic endorsements such as Representatives Biskupski and Johnson along with Senators McCoy, Romero, and Davis. Furthermore the Stonewall Democrats and PPAC have come out swinging for Lisa. Lisa’s top issue is historic preservation.

Phil Carroll appears to be the favorite amongst more conservative Mormons in the district. Carroll is currently the president of the nonprofit Community Housing Services and is concerned about the replacement of hold homes with new, larger ones in the district.

Jennifer J. Johnson (jjjslc.com) is certainly the most unconventional candidate in the race with a large, green, umbrella representing her idea of an all encompassing idea of change towards how the city is viewed by the rest of the world. She wants to make the city greener, smarter, hipper, and safer.

Stan Penfold (friendsofstan.com) is the other heavy-weight in the race. With endorsements from current Salt Lake Mayor Ralph Becker, exiting Councilmember Eric Jergensen, and current Chairwoman of the Salt Lake City Council Jill Remington Love, it is clear that he is the candidate that will fit in best on day one. Stan, too, has been endorsed by the Stonewall Democrats and PPAC along with Equality Utah.

Yossof Sharifi (vote-yo.com) is probably the most Libertarian of the bunch, supporting the majority of progressive social issues while favoring the free market when it comes to arts and parks funding. Yossof’s idea of putting lawyers in the field to help find the root causes of crime is an intriguing one, and the idea of lower taxes is always popular.

Written by Derek Jones:

My boyfriend and I were walking home from the Gallivan Center concert series and naturally had to walk down the pedestrian mall (it was a direct path to our house and we have walked it many times together).  We were holding hands.

Matt paused to say something to me and hugged and kissed me.

At that moment, several LDS church security guards came up to us and asked us to leave because we were being inappropriate.

Matt moved in closer to me and put his arm around me and asked the security guards loudly “what are we doing wrong?” We were obviously annoyed that they singled us out, especially since we were just passing through and not spending considerable time there. And there were no other people on the easement that we could see.

At this point they said that they wanted us to leave because of the public display of affection and that they do not allow any sorts of public displays of affection on the easement whatsoever. This especially irked the both of us because having walked through on a frequent basis (we often walk to work through there) and every time I have been through there are either marriage ceremonies going on, young mormon [sic] couples cuddling in front the fountain, hugging, holding hands, etc.

Matt then tried to get them to admit they were singling us out because they just didn’t approve of “gay” public displays of affection, baiting them into revealing their bigotry.

As all this was going on, several more security guards began showing up. I didn’t make an actual count but I would guess about 10 security guards were now surrounding us.

One of the security guards then got in Matt’s face and expressed very forcefully that “we (meaning straight people?) don’t come to your house and make-out on our property.” At this point Matt called him on his [expletive deleted] and mentioned that every time he has been through, he’s seen brides and grooms, couples holding hands on the pavement etc.

The security guards then changed their strategy and went the route of telling us that the easement is privately owned by the church and they can basically kick-out anyone they deem being offensive or inappropriate. This is technically true, but at the time I thought that it was a public easement and they had no rights to kick us out for holding hands (I didn’t really follow the controversy back in 2003 when the City ended up caving into the Mormon Church’s request to make the easement private property).

At this point they then split us up and forced me onto the ground on my stomach. They put my face against the pavement and handcuffed my hands behind my back. They then did a search and took everything out of our pockets. They did the same to Matt, although he resisted (not violently) and they weren’t able to get him on the ground because he’s a big guy and it took four or five of their guys to get him handcuffed. Matt remembers asking “what are you doing? Why are you doing this?” Then Matt launched into them verbally, telling them that they were hypocrites and did not have the authority to be arresting us.  Matt never threatened them, nor was he ever violent. He even explicitly told them that we were not being violent and that handcuffing was completely unnecessary. Neither of us are violent people. We were just trying to get them to have a civil conversation with us about the real reasons they wanted us to leave. Matt then asked if what they are doing was legal.  The security guards tried to claim that they were the cops. One of them even pulled out a fake badge and said he used to be a cop.

Matt then asked where the real cops were and they then said we could either leave, or they would get the cops. While we waited for the cops to arrive, the security guards kept trying to take pictures of us with their digital cameras. They also tried to accuse us being intoxicated although we were not. I admitted to have A beer at the gallivant, but that was hours before.

The cops finally showed up and talked to the church security away from while we still sat in cuffs. The police then escorted off the easement and took off our cuffs. We answered their questions and the one cop tried to shame us by pointing out we had been drinking, at which point Matt said “of course I have been we were at the Gallivan and took the responsible route by walking
home.

The cop then dropped that line of attack that [sic].

The cops then issued us both citations for trespassing and let us go.

Update: Some of the commenters seem to be under the impression that I, as author of this blog, was one of the victims of the preceding incidents – I wish to clarify that I am simply reporting the information as I have received it from the two directly.  It is for this reason that I have not answered what I plan to do because I have no direct connection to the case – other than the fact that people I know and care about have been directly affected by it. My appologies for any confusion.