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.

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.

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.

It soon became clear that the discussions that took place prior to the announcement were a direct result of both the backlash created by the LDS Church’s stance on Proposition 8 and the public relations nightmare resulting from the Main Street Kiss. Both sides, despite living in the same city, had no idea how the other side felt about the issues surrounding these contentious issues; both sides felt that they had the high road; both sides refused to budge.

Now, being the filthy non-Mormon, liberal Democrat that I am, I naturally felt that the Church should be willing to bend more – but that is exactly the same thought pattern that caused these tensions in the first place.  As I discussed in an earlier post, the LDS Church and the GLBT community needed to use the heated debate surrounding these issues to talk rather than shut down, and I am happy to see that both sides did just that.

But don’t get too excited GLBT community.  The Church made it all too clear that they still feel that marriage should be between a man and a woman and that they will fight to keep the sanctity of marriage in tact.  Furthermore, they acknowledged that the issues being discussed (fair housing and equal employment) are basic rights, but they still remain silent on issues such as hospital visitation, adoption, and the grand-daddy of them all, civil unions.

Tuesday was also marked with a very vocal (and very small) minority of people opposed to the ordinance. Rich Piatt of KSL accurately noted that objections focused more on the concept of homosexuals and homosexual conduct when discussing the law, and not legal ramifications of the ordinance.  This truth echos a growing trend around the nation that either consciously or unconsciously knows that it can no longer fight laws such as the Nondiscrimination ordinance through legal means and must, therefore, appeal to peoples fears.  Though this is not new, the idea that one avenue has been closed means forces opponents to use less civilized ways to get their point across.  In short, things are going to get ugly, and I can’t discount more extreme as well.  As members of the GLBT community rightfully become recognized as a class that needs protection from hate speech and action, the more they are going to need it from hatemongers.

But please don’t become too depressed from this post. The fact that as dominant of a power as the LDS Church not only changed their views marks a huge step both locally and nationally.  Keep in mind that the Church did not have to say anything if they didn’t want to; their choice to speak shows that they are willing to focus the flock on the teachings set forth in the New Testament, rather than one line in Leviticus, when it comes to discussing homosexuality – for this, I applaud them.

Finally, I would be remiss if I did not discuss the political ramifications from Tuesdays landmark passage.  Already Park City and Salt Lake County are considering passage of similar measures.  Moderate legislators on Utah’s Capitol Hill who may personally want to vote for equal rights measures but can’t politically now have more legitimacy when reporting to their constituents while more conservative members have lost the smoke screen excuses the LDS Church used to provide.  Finally, and perhaps more importantly, large numbers of individuals within the LDS Church now have an official statement to discuss openly and honestly with other members – by removing some ambiguity on this issue, many people within this state may be more tolerant towards their fellow man.

7:00 – Council members greet the near packed chamber building.  All the big wigs of the GLBT community are ready to speak on the issue. Hopes are high amongst supporters.

7:05 – Meeting called into order, Soren Simonson is chairing the meeting and welcomes the large crowd.

7:08 – LDS Church weighs in “the ordinance…concern important questions for this community… The Church agrees with Mayor Becker.” These ordinance are fair and reasonable and don’t do violence to the institution of marriage.  The Church still intends to continue fighting for these rights, but this ordinance is in line with Jesus’ teachings.

7:12 – Sen. McCoy “I fully support and expect the council to fully support the ordinance…you have approached this topic with respect and zeal…Salt Like has as sizable GLBT population and that, unfortunately, they face discrimination on housing based sole on their GLBT status.  This fact, unfortunately, does not make Salt Lake unique…having discovered this truth, the Mayor and Council is trying to reverse this error…Salt Lake City is a great American City.”

7:15 – First opposition to the ordinance. Main point is that this is a sexual issue and that if people don’t want to associate with someones sexual conduct, they should not have it forced upon them by the government.  “If you look at what homosexualism is, you can’t dissociated it with sex.” Homosexuals are not “like the blacks or women who can’t vote.”

7:18 – “The GLBT community wishes to overhaul America and creating a ‘Bible’ for homosexuals…Television should be used to change the minds of the people.” The GLBT community has tried to overhaul the laws by changing peoples minds and that a lot of the people in the room are victims of this.  The chamber is officially standing room only.

7:21 – “God will remove his hand from this nation (if we support this ordinace)…If you pass this law, if they have functions for Christmas and they bring their partners, what will the children in that room think?”

7:24 – Deeda Seed is “delighted to stand with the LDS Church on this issue.”

7:29 – “As a result of what you have done, the world will see us differently, and more favorably.  I urge you to pass this ordinance.”

7:30 – “It is not about discrimination, it is about respect.”

7:31 – “This ordiniance represents good policy” Gordon Storrs.

7:37 – Very somber retelling of a mans personal story of his love of another man in the Church.  “Don’t do this for me, do it for him.  May God bless you.” Very powerful. The camber has a very respectful and somber tone, however spirits continue to remain high.

7:41 – “We must move foward in fighting in justice for all.”

7:43 – “These ordinances do not create special rights or create special statuses…they give the same protections to all Utahans – you can’t be fired because you are strait or gay, you should be judged on your ability.”

7:45 – (personal note) The intolerance appears to be dripping from the Rodriguez family.  They seem to fear anything that they don’t understand… They are speaking in a way that creates the problems that this ordinance wishes to solve in the first place. They are why people are disrespected in this way.  Furthermore we have come across someone who just about whipped out the “It’s not Adam and Steve” argument.

7:54 – Gail Turpin “There have been things that have be said that hurt my heart.” We must try to come together.

7:59 – “The Bible has been used to allow all sorts of discrimination in the past.  Thankfully we don’t look at the Bible, we look to the Constitution.”

8:08 – Rep. Johnson – “I would like to publicly thank the Church Of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints…It sends a clear message that it shows that we are members of humanity.  I find it interesting that we have not heard from one single Salt Lake City employer against this bill… not one that says that they don’t want to hire people because they are gay. Only one family has objected because they are afraid that people are acting gay; let me tell you right now, before this chamber, that I am ‘acting gay’…Let me remind you that support of this bill is not supporting homosexuality, it is supporting equality.”  Also, someone in the back said “not true” to that final statement in a true Joe Wilson moment.

8:14 – “Hopefully this is the first honest step in opening a dialogue between the LDS Church and the GLBT community.”

8:16 – Public input is closed on the issue. Remington Love moves to enact the two codes, Jergensen seconds motion. Remington Love “There are rarely clear cut issues, this is not one of those issues.  We recommit tonight that Salt Lake City is committed to equality. We are a stronger, better, city because of this…I am proud to serve on a City Council where this isn’t even a contentious issue.” Jergensen – “There is specific and emperical data that shows that the GLBT community has been discriminated against in housing and employment…Someone mentioned that to pass this law was ‘morally wrong,’ someone said that the bible speaks against homosexuality.  We may disagree on what the Bible says, but nowhere in the Bible have I read that discrimination is acceptable against another person.”

8:26 – Councilman Turner – “We want to make sure everyone here is treated fairly. We all have skills and education that we can all use to make our lives and society better…We need to be fair on these things, it is the just way to be.”

8:30 – Councilman Christensen – “I am delighted to support this ordinance, and should be used to bring us together.”

8:33 – Councilman Martin – “We come from families, we have businesses, we have neighbors, and that is who we are. I think that people think that, once we are elected, something happens to us – that we become different people and forget who we are; I can tell you that that  is not the case.  What does change is that we learn, listen, and study…it is part of the job…we do come to learn that we have compassion and respect. We can not make decisions out of ignorance…Equality is the right thing.”

8:39 – Councilman Simonson – “I hope that this is an indicator that other local governments and the State may follow suit that there is a tremendous need for this sort of legislation…and that there is something we can do about to fix it.”

8:40 – Council passes the two ordinances unanimously – they receive a standing ovation.

ANALYSIS COMING SOON.

Carlton Christensen, the Gentle Giant, has been a mainstay in west side politics for the past 11 years as District 1’s representative. Carlton’s work with many civic organizations, combined with his life long love of the district, not only shows his passion to serve, but also his effectiveness. I wholeheartedly support Carlton in his bid for a fourth term as my couniclperson.

Carlton knows what the district needs, and fights for it. He has helped to secure funding for a west side light rail line and a new North Temple viaduct, helped to expand the Jordan River Parkway to the county line and improved neighborhood parks, supported the “green waste” city collection program and the construction of a new west-side fire station and police precinct. All this while being fiscally responsible with the citizens money.

But his eyes are also towards the future. As a proponent for responsible growth, and sustainable economic development, it is hard to say no to Carlton. I must admit that I also agree with his desire to construct a new Public Safety Building…all while keeping the cities books balanced. As a long time member of Salt Lake Peer Court, I also am impressed with Carlton’s desire to help youth earlier in life by preventing gang activity and encouraging them to grow and succeed.

But Carlton’s other supporters also speak volumes. Not only is Carlton endorsed by Mayor Ralph Becker and the districts main State Representative, Jen Seelig, Carlton has also been endorsed by the districts State Senator, Luz Robles, whom Carlton ran against and lost to in 2008. It should be noted that Carlton ran as a Republican in that race, while Becker, Seelig, and Robles are all Democrats. That alone should show that Carlton knows what democracy should be – the right to disagree without being disagreeable. Indeed, I was impressed and respected how honest and professional Carlton was in that race, despite the fact that I did not vote for him at the time.

I do feel that is worth mentioning that Carlton’s opponent does not appear to hold this same value in mind. After coming in a distant second in last Tuesday’s primary, Carlton’s opponent argued that LDS candidates fair far better in elections because they have “built-in get out the vote mechanism(s).” Not only is this statement offensive, but it is out and out false for the district – only a quarter of residents are active Mormons. I am not Mormon and I am a fierce Democrat, and I can tell you that she received 25% of the vote because her issues simply did not match with the needs of the district. Her only discernible issue of note was that she wanted to eliminate prostitution on North Temple, a worthy goal to be sure, but she certainly gave me no reason why she would be the better candidate to do this, or any other task for that matter, when compared to Carlton.

Carlton Christensen is a hard working member of our community, and his tireless service should be noted and lauded. I, for one, and happy to back Carlton and hope that, if you have the opportunity, you will cast your vote for him on November 3^rd.

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.

So a friend of mine informed me, by way of Facebook status updates, that he was, he claims, illegally detained and charged with a Class C Misdemeanor for trespassing on the Main Street pedestrian mall in Downtown Salt Lake. The reason, he claims, is that he was holding the hand of his gay partner.

As I said, this is breaking and the facts are not in – however I would not be surprised to hear if it was entirely true.

For those of you who don’t recall, the Salt Lake City approved the sale of a section of Main Street in Downtown in April 1999 to the Mormon church from South Temple to North Temple, effectively connecting the LDS Temple grounds with the LDS Offices. The debate was heated as the land would effectively become private property and events, such as this, could (in theory at the time) be prosecuted. In the end the Church won and we see the symptoms of this victory today – assuming it is true.

But is it right?

Unlike the block housing the LDS Temple, the area is completely open and accessible to the public – indeed, I have cut through the area from time to time with no trouble whatsoever.  The area offers no physical restrictions and to someone who knew nothing of the Mormon culture, would assume it was a park area (all be it with an interesting choice in architecture).  Now these two are long standing residents of the state and city, but my point still stands.

How would we be viewed by the national press if this had been a couple from another city our country? Is this how the Church really wants to be perceived – especially after the the whole Proposition 8 dust up? Furthermore, it should not be forgotten that the Church “does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family.”

One would reasonably assume that holding hands is far less of an attack against “traditional marriage” than, say, allowing gay couples to enter into mutual contracts. Yet, if these allegations are true, here we are.

So what is more important, your First Amendment right to peaceably assemble and pass through an area, unknowingly trespassing, or arresting people because you think they are ookie? I have no doubt that they broke the actual law, but did they break the spirit of it?

P.S. Any posts that reference a religious verse or doctrine directly will be blocked – this is a legal issue and, therefore, requires a legal response. Furthermore, morality is not the dependant on any particular religion, rather it is the concept that we should be good to one another; therefore, replies regarding morality in a religious context, too, will be blocked.

Update: Read the account of this from one of the individuals arrested by clicking here.

Update: Salt Lake Tribune reporting, Deseret News reporting (the only one who acknowledged this blog directly – thanks Clayton), Q Salt Lake reporting, CBS 2 Reporting, ABC 4 Reporting, KSL 5 Reporting, Fox 13 Reporting.

We all recall the recent dust up regarding the Public Safety Building (PSB) being located on Library Square. Mayor Becker, seeing the writing on the wall, backed down from this plan in what I feel was a win for his transparent government style.  Not ignoring the fact that we do, in fact, need a PSB, Mayor Becker has now backing an idea that would place the PSB on the east side of 300 East, across the street from the Main Library.

Now, if you were reading the Salt Lake Tribune, you would think that this was the first time Becker ever even considered this option – bowing to the whims of public pressure and showing weakness as he does it.  Furthermore, if you were to read the comments on the article (I don’t know why I put myself through this stuff but I do), you would see people up in arms that it is not being placed somewhere else and that they are under the impression that Becker is just throwing darts on a map of Downtown Salt Lake to pick a site.

This…makes my head hurt.

Six weeks ago I wrote my first post about the PSB and, sure enough, it mentioned all of the main proposals Mayor Becker wished to put forward – including two on the east side of 300 East! In other words, Becker already had this plan! True, he did back the Library Square option, but that does not mean that he ruled out others.

But does the Trib, in its increasingly lackluster reporting, discuss this? Nope.  All they want to do is take advantage of the passions associated with the original proposal.

Oh well, I have said it before and I will say it again:  I support and see the need for a PSB in Downtown; the idea of a “civics campus” appeals to me, conservatives (who wouldn’t give away a single dime even if it saved their mothers life) will oppose it, and Becker needs to make sure he does a good job communicating his ideas to a unfocused yet passionate public.