The Life on State project establishes a shared vision for the future of
our valley's central, historic corridor. The vision was built on broad
involvement from residents and stakeholders along State Street, claims Wasatch Front Regional Council, a Metro Planning Organization social engineering every community along the Wasatch Front. An un-elected board of state and local elected leaders under the direction of Andrew Gruber. To uncover the was these organizations work and co-opt the community to accept THEIR PLAN as our own the following information is very enlightening.
Planners
call Envision Utah a ‘national model’ for regional planning. The
Brookings Institute cited Utah as a “leader in [voluntary] regional
planning…”
Behind the inflated congratulations lies sophisticated deceit and manipulation fast becoming the standard for regional planning.
Envision Utah began over 15 years ago as a public-private partnership
offering recommendations to cities and counties to preserve open space,
increase transportation choices and more.
Envision Utah claims to have one of regional planning’s most successful
outreach programs. Nearly 2,000 people attended 50 workshops and 17,500
responded to online and mail-in surveys. Yet, the turnout is no wonder.
In one of the longest-running marketing campaigns in planning history,
Envision Utah proponents assured residents that joining the plan was
voluntary. There would be no un-elected regional councils, no regional
plan, and the community would design the planning scenarios. This
‘no-risk’ campaign effectively disarmed community members’ objections,
leaving planners free to advance their programs beneath a mantel of
“neutrality”.
But, Envision Utah’s promissory jargon belies the unscrupulous tactics
they used to win residents’ approval for the same mixed-use-open space
algorithm that has been rejected in Utah and communities across the
country.
Marketing to values-
Early in the planning process, the Envision Utah steering committee
hired nationally recognized polling firm, Wirthland Worldwide, to
determine the ‘quality of life’ values held by community members.
Survey results revealed that most respondents saw their state as a “safe
haven, where others shared their common sense of honesty, morality and
ethics.” They placed these values in the context of children and their
families.
Envision Utah proponents then used these values as the centerpiece of a
targeted marketing strategy designed to impose the planner’s ideas
community by community.
Renaming controversial ideas-
Since the survey indicated family interaction was a high priority,
planners re-branded their efforts. Urban planning became the glue that
held families together. “High-density living”, was recast as compact
housing that allowed young families to locate near relatives.
Grandparents were urged to buy condos near their children rather than
worry about new zoning laws that could restrict single family homes.
Planners rarely discussed their role in creating the “restrictions.”
Planners replaced the unpopular term “Smart Growth”, with the more
benign, “Quality Growth Strategy.” In keeping with their targeted
marketing, Quality Growth meant keeping the air and water clean for
children and grandchildren.
In 1998 Envision Utah developed a unique “chip game” which allowed
community participants to place chips, representing homes, on a map to decide the future layout of their community. In deciding where to place
homes, people had to consider complex issues such sewage lines,
utilities and other services. It was billed as people talking charge of
their future. Yet, even this community activity was highly controlled.
Early on planners established basic understandings. More open spaces
were needed, long work drives damaged the environment and urban sprawl
was to be avoided. This left the players few planning options. It was no
surprise when most participants decided in favor of the same mixed-use,
transit oriented living the planners wanted all along.
Promoting the vague-
Envision Utah avoided creating a visible plan that could be analyzed.
Instead planners talked about principles, and suggested, rather than
advocated, transit-oriented living, mixed-use and open spaces. They
then ‘nudged’ community members to “do the right thing” by barraging
them with internet ads, newspaper articles and workshops educating
Utahans to the dangers of not having these urban designs.
In one example, Utah Transit Authority’s “King of the Road” commercial
showed a man driving his convertible top-down, humming to the 60’s tune.
Meanwhile, the crawl says, “He doesn’t know the words…Also doesn’t know
that UTA takes 81,000 cars a year off the road.”
In 30 seconds, the ad depicts young, carefree people who love freedom as
clueless, while reinforcing the dubious assumption that driving less is
undeniably beneficial. At best, it is undeniably controversial.
Winning through fear-
Often scare tactics employed half-truths as in this example from Envision Utah’s website:
“In urban areas, land close to existing job centers is rapidly disappearing, and if we’re not careful about how we grow, housing costs
could skyrocket and force many of our good, hard-working neighbors
elsewhere— excluding from our communities teachers, fire fighters, and
our own children as they get their start in life. The further Utahans
live from where they work, shop and play, the more they spend on
car-related expenses.”
Notice the implied threat that if people do not live in a high density
area, they could lose teachers, firefighters and even their own children
(remember the values survey results) to rising costs. Little
consideration was given to the exorbitant housing costs in other Smart
Growth areas like, Seattle and Portland. The observation that car-costs
rise if you move away from the urban center, overlooks the reality
that, for many, this may be a worthwhile trade-off.
In spite of Envision Utah’s calculated posturing, there is little “neutral” about these statements.
The king of surveys-
Colorful, interactive online surveys still attract thousands and are promoted by Envision Utah and the state.
In this survey, targeting residents of Madison County, Utah, the
planners explain that higher priced home costs are the result of larger
lots and will require “individual families to sink wells and septic
tanks.” Larger properties and self-contained services are positioned as
burdens with no talk of the benefits.
Beneath the graph, planners note, “The more you spread out, the more
expensive it is. This is not a judgment, just facts to think about.
Road costs [are] paid by everybody.” The message is clear. Roads are
costly, and if you want more, you are selfish since everyone else pays
for them. There is no mention of the increased respiratory diseases,
traffic congestion and exorbitant housing costs that accompany the
high-density living planners are promoting.
As one seasoned planner observed, “Envision Utah uses the most biased surveys I have ever seen.”
Keys to success-
If Envision Utah has met success, it is mainly the result of distorted
facts and a relentless, decade’s long marketing campaign creating the
illusion that planners are neutral and participation is “voluntary.”
One must wonder how many communities would volunteer if equal efforts
were expended marketing the failures of compact living.
In spite of the deceptions, other regions, including Envision Missoula,
Building the Wyoming We Want, Envision Central Texas, Louisiana Speaks,
Superstition Vistas, Thrive 2055, and many more are adopting all or a
portion of the Envision Utah model.
But plans that lure participants through deception can result in unwanted surprises.
Un-elected regional councils with the authority to mandate local zoning
and regulations are the goal post of regional planning. Yet, Envision
Utah created no new un-elected council. Urban designs are built upon
pre-existing regional authorities like local Metropolitan Planning Organizations and the Utah Transit Authority. But once the smaller
regional plans are completed, there is little to prevent a consortium of
their leaders from formalizing a single larger region. Will this
happen? It’s hard to say.
But history shows, all it takes is a little deceit and a good marketing campaign.
Learn more about planning and Sustainable Development
Learn The Lingo, Vernacular, Buzz Words, Jargon here.
This is one time when the popular misquotation—"Something's
rotten in Denmark"—is a real improvement on the original. But you
ought to be careful around purists, who will also remember that the
minor character Marcellus, and not Hamlet, is the one who coins the
phrase. There's a reason he says "state of Denmark" rather than
just Denmark: the fish is rotting from the head down—all is not
well at the top of the political hierarchy."
Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams, (former Senator 2009-2013), through prodding the Utah Legislature, constructed a bill forcing Salt Lake County residents to decide once and for all if they will remain independent. Salt Lake County Residents will participate in a, "Mail In Ballot Only" election, November 2015 in which County Islands and Townships will have to choose whether to join an adjacent city or remain an entity of Salt Lake County. Governor Gary Herbert signed the 236 page bill (SB-199) which passed the Senate (25-5-1) and the House (68-6-1) into action March 30, 2015. Salt Lake County's first notice to the public was for June 3 and the 30th was the second public notice, of which I received none. These hearings where to discuss boundaries only, and it has been on the "bullet train" to it's destination ever since! They waited until September to approach the residents with their "sales pitch". No public comment was allowed at our meeting at Eastmont Middle School in Sandy. Hand-written questions only! Can anyone say "Delphi"? We have the Utah Legislature to thank once more for "saving us from ourselves" as all government is afraid of "organic government" percolating from the bottom up! They are, metaphorically, "putting a gun to the heads" of county residents to commit to annexing while putting ourselves out of their misery of thinking we have an ability to come up with a plan of our own. Before this bill was passed residents could come together and petition the county for annexation into a neighboring city, now they are forcing the remaining islands to decide once and for all this November. And In my case, cramming to do research from the late date of September 18th! This effects our personal property rights and should not be taken lightly, but the county is banking on it! There are many reasons I see for them coming up with this scheme, some of which I'll mention here.
Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams leads the way on bike path.
As you may or may not know, Mayor Ben McAdams serves on several Un-elected Boards and Councils of Governments (COG), including Envision Utah (Board of Directors) and Wasatch Front Regional Council,Smart Growth America, Transportation For America among others. He clearly endorses and advocates for United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development Smart Growth policies. For example- He's been seen sporting a bike helmet in a photo op where he reveals the county put up $700,000 in grants to ensure bikers safety on county roads, (that's money raised from motorists mind you). I think it's his agenda to get the county, including cities and townships, locked up to deliver them as prisoners to the global governance goal of control of every one and every thing! He, and his cronies, have to cement this plan through planning and zoning, which was required language in the bill. I have seen him giddy as a school girl "skip" to the podium as he opened the meeting for Wasatch Choice 2040 in which he praises Andrew Gruber and the regional plan. "Celebrate the end of the beginning", you say? Maybe a subliminal meaning there?
Where the CPA is concerned, I do feel that the islands are expendable as far as the plan goes. The county could care less about them, with the exception of Willow Creek. Willow Creek residents, from what I heard in the public hearings on boundaries, has been courted by Sandy City for many years trying to get the high income area to annex into Sandy. The county, I feel, initiated the "divide and conquer" technique in order to force residents to choose between Sandy and recently incorporated Cottonwood Heights. Township? Nope, that's out! It's rumored that both cities are in need of property tax revenue, and Willow Creek would provide that. Single family private property owners are the bread and butter that keep cities humming, although a member of our panel made it sound like we are mooching off Kennecott and Snowbird! "Might I remind you, the residents built the towns." At any rate, I think this is why the county did not include the islands in the middle of the map in any of the committees and discussions in hopes that we would get mad and join an adjoining city. I'm irate mind you, but I don't want to be a part of a city that is "hook line and sinker", neck deep in the global agenda, and is waging war against private property rights and individual sovereignty (Sandy City). They can't make the people comply with UN Agenda 21 (Re-branded 2030 Agenda or Plan 2030) if they aren't a part of these cities. They have their operatives in the townships, islands are expendable. At this point it's resist and fight to the death!
Now to the process. The assistant mayor, who ran the meeting, (Kimberly Barnett), bragged about having over 100 individuals participate in the process, but when you consider there are 160,000 property owners effected that is less than one percent! It's a pittance! They should be ashamed not BRAGGING about it! The mayor said, "they advertised for positions on the committee", yet I could only find this where he describes an effort to, "bring peace to a decades-old fight", the old Hegelian Dialectic at work. And if you watch this, it's almost laughable they couldn't find anyone to participate in an episode of Trib Talk who wasn't "in house", and where no viewers submitted questions. In short there was a limited few on the committee and no one represented my island, one being a Salt Lake Tribune Employee, makes you wonder about the rest of the appointments. During this process the committee should have been communicating with the members they represented and I didn't hear one word about it. Aimee Winder-Newton even admits to "rushing the process so they could control the message". The first time I heard about it was when I received a postcard in the mail informing me I would be voting on the measure in November by mail in ballot, and that a community town hall would be held in a little over a week. Needless to say, I was dumbfounded! I scrambled to find out what in the heck was going on. In my search I found that Zions Bank was awarded the contract to do the financial study. I found the report online and several things puzzled me. Why Zions Bank? Why not private property rights groups or tax watch dogs? Why did Zions not do a complete and comprehensive comparison? Why did they "cherry pick" a handful of line items to feed the public? I found it interesting that in their report each comparison found a cost benefit to annexing to a neighboring city of an average $115.00. I did ask a very detailed question at our town hall about Zions Bank winning the bid, but was not given a honest answer. I asked, "who competed for the contract and why was it awarded to Zions Bank"? Kimberly Barnett, assistant mayor, basically said, Zions won! We were informed at our town hall September 28, 2015 that we would receive a pamphlet in the mail before the election in order to provide us with the information to make an "informed decision". I told Aimee Winder-Newton after the meeting, "I already printed mine off online"! I did it as part of my research, and as far as I'm concerned it's not worth the paper it's printed on! And-I've already received my ballot and not the pamphlet! And that's the plan, to not give residents enough time to investigate and time to protest. The town hall meeting I attended was a "let's control the agenda so these people don't get any ideas on their own", and "let's go through the motions so we can say we did...this is a 'done deal' these people are going to Sandy City" type attitude. There was a table set up at the front of the auditorium with a podium. Three mics on the table and one at the podium. As far as I remember there were only two council members there, the mayor and assistant mayor, county attorney rep. someone from public works I think, two Zions Bank personnel and other staff members. One woman was practically laying on the table she was so bored! John Hiskey, council to Sandy City Mayor, was summoned from the audience to answer questions from the residents. No other neighboring cities were represented. There was a "supposed" panel of our peers, (2) reviewing our questions before they were given to the assistant mayor for panel answers, but she was monitoring the whole process scrutinizing the hand written questions and instructing them as to what to do with them including altering them with pen or pencil. Kimberly Barnett did not ask the questions as they were written, and when clarification was needed, she still did not invite us to address the panel members via microphone. Ms. Barnett and Zions Bank presented power point presentations as "tokens" to the process in which Kimberly Barnett spoke to us like kindergartners and Zions bank tried to make their incomplete report look like they had spent more than an afternoon putting it together. And if you've ever looked at your property tax statement, it wasn't even close in comparison. I wonder how much we paid for that study? This whole thing is a sham! As was reported at the June 3rd Public Comment Session,
"I don't want to become part of the debt of
Cottonwood Heights or Sandy," said Michelle Greer, one of many Willow
Creek residents who expressed a desire to keep their community intact
and remain part of the unincorporated county.
"Hands off, bozo," added Cindy Deckard. "I am
adamantly opposed to the division of our neighborhood and annexation to
either of these towns. We don't need to encourage building their mayors'
kingdoms." ~ Salt Lake Tribune
Awe...music to my ears!
Although our Community Town Hall at Eastmont violated Utah Code I managed to pull out my phone on the fly to try to capture it for the public. In order to publish it I created a video, which I will display below as soon as it is uploaded. Leave it to the citizens to do what government won't, as it should be. Town Halls are also supposed to be a time for the politicians to LISTEN to the citizens, but at this one all they wanted to do is have us ask questions, they did not want dialog! I won't cover every little detail in this blog post, but I will post links for information that will help you catch a glimpse into their involving, or not involving the public, whatever the case may be. If you want to listen to the public hearings on boundaries check this link (June 3 & 30 audio). I also made a video of the comments I intended to make at the County Islands Community Preservation Town Hall, which the public was barred from speaking at, it also gives some insight into other topics I did not include in this post that I think are important to point out. There is also an effort to petition the County Attorney Sim Gil to have a more comprehensive report done, another thing we'll pay double for for sloppy contract work. Remember Syncrete? In short, at this stage in the game, I want LESS government not MORE! We do have a choice...a choice we are FORCED to make, but "I" for one, am voting to eliminate a level of government...the city level. I like the idea of the citizens percolating their own ideas, not being spoon-fed by politicians even if, "it's a messy process our founders left us", quoting Mayor Ben McAdams. That's the problem with psychopaths, they want to make decisions for others, always unaware of how their decisions effect them. I hope the Islands will Stand With Me and Vote To Remain A Salt Lake County Island this November and help support private property rights and an independent citizenry.
Well, I hope I've "cleared the air". When something stinks, pull out the air freshener. Enjoy the links and the video!
Since we were not allowed to speak at the Town Hall Meeting here is "My Two Cents."
"First-I appreciate Salt Lake County sending me a post card alerting me to the meeting tonight. This is the way government should work, although I have to say I was shocked that this process was not known to me, as this is the first notice I received about a process put into action by the County Mayor through the Legislature (SB-199) that would put my private property rights up for sale to the highest bidder. Like Count My Vote, where the Utah Legislature galloped in on their "white horse" to "save us" from ourselves, stripping us of our Neighborhood Caucus' and extinguishing the Republican Party.
I did listen to the Public Comment Session held in June online, therefore, my following comments.
I am a life long resident of Salt Lake County. I purchased my first home on a County Island and have lived there for 33 years. Unlike Millcreek and Willow Creek, I have not received "impeccable service." I reside on a small island I lovingly refer to as "the black hole." We have 2 streetlights. Our street is so dark we can't even get trick-or-treaters to our home on Halloween night! The first time I saw a yard waste container was before the election where Peter Caroon ran against Nancy Workman, and it's been hit and miss ever since. There is a constant battle to get our street and circle plowed in the winter, although our island is closer to the snow plow facility.
Every City/County is contracted by the citizens to provide Police, Fire/Emergency Services, and Public Works, nothing more. Nothing less!
Let me say a few words about Sandy City and their contract to provide water, fire and emergency services to our island. We have had no less that 6 water-main breaks in the last 3 years, and it is common knowledge between fire departments in the valley that the Fire Department is not properly compensated for putting their lives on the line everyday for the citizenry. These two things concern me, as Sandy is involved in mass construction projects of multi-family dwellings where you have to share a wall with someone. This will definitely over tax these services.
Now to the "Process." Why this? Why now? Why was Zions Bank awarded the contract to do the study? Why not give it to Tax Watchdogs and Private Property Rights Advocates? I'll tell you why...because there is an Agenda here! Zions Bank is a SHILL for Wasatch Front Regional Council! A COG! A non-profit Planning Organization that legitimizes itself by surrounding itself with elected officials from every city and county along the Wasatch Front. They claim credence by way of the Utah Legislature. They have incestual relationships with Zions Bank, Envision Utah, UCAIR, the Governor's Office and more! It is unconstitutional "Regional Government", not elected by We The People! It is nothing more than a money-laundering scheme that takes our tax dollars and then doles them out again as grants to Zions Bank, Sandy City, Cottonwood Heights and other cities in order to implement an International Agenda. Our county tax dollars have been funding ICLEI-the International Council For Local Environmental Initiatives, which is tied to United Nations Agenda 21-Sustainable Development-Smart Growth. Let me use this opportunity to insist that the county STOP sending our tax dollars to this entity. Senate Bill 199 was written in a way that "Planning and Zoning" be a part of the language. And that's the catch! Planning and Zoning is the vehicle every city who is a member of the "Regional Council of Government" is using to bring about this Agenda.
In the public comment session in June, Mayor Ben McAdams said, "Our Founding Fathers left us a messy process"! No! Mayor. The process is very simple. If government would operate under the prism of the Constitution!
In closing, the "Community Preservation Act" is anything but!...Government should not be a Corporation! I don't want any corporation dictating my God Given Rights! The government resides in The People! I am declaring my Independence, and I hope my fellow citizens will do the same and remain in Salt Lake County."
September 28, 2015 Community Preservation Act Town Hall Meeting Eastmont Middle School Sandy Utah 7:00 - 8:30 p.m.
