Facts on Attacks

My opponent has directed people to her website and has taken exception to my voting record. In her article, "Midge's Voting Record, Does Midge Walk the Talk", she has repeatedly made assumptions as to why I voted a particular way and has strongly expressed her opinion in opposition. Here are the FACTS about the ATTACKS.

While these statements deal with her concerns, I'm quite sure that you have issues that may or may not be the same. If you have further questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 377-2444. I'm always available to discuss the issues with you. Thank you in advance for taking the time to get educated. I would very much appreciate your confidence in me and your support on November 6th!

During my first campaign some neighbors were upset about certain methods used to determine who had illegal apartments, over-occupancy violations, etc. There was much strife and conflict in one neighborhood. I never took exception with a filed application for an A-Overlay. I did however, take issue with the process. I am for neighborhoods choosing what they want their neighborhoods to be like. The process of signing petitions, etc., has proven problematic and detrimental to good neighborhoods. It pits neighbor against neighbor. The Council has since changed the process of applying for an A-overlay.

The second-kitchen ordinance was reviewed and discussed at length. While I fought hard to have an exception for seniors over a certain age, other council members felt it would open Pandora's box so the issue didn't have the votes to carry. I feel strongly that people should have the right to stay in their own homes as they age, and, I would like to see a provision that allows them some flexibility wherever they live. I would welcome the opportunity to revisit this issue.

I believe people should obey the law, which includes zoning laws. I voted to fund more zoning officers and to fund efficient software that could manage case load, allowing our enforcement officers to be more effective. I believe the current system of enforcement by complaint is adequate. I believe a stronger, more forceful, random policing of homes would be seen as unfavorable throughout the city. It is impossible for the city to know of many violations unless reported by our good citizens. Zoning enforcement, by nature, is confusing. The city has a heavy burden of proof, and it is very difficult to gather enough evidence to prevail in court. I would like to see the Council change some infractions to be civil matters rather than criminal matters. Our burden of proof would then be only a preponderance of guilt and would be easier to hold people accountable.

200 North has been designated as a collector road for over fifteen years. After discussing the issue at length with our engineering staff, I realized the need and importance of good connectivity for our city's future, especially with east-west connectivity. Expert testimony by staff and transportation officials supported my vote and the three others who joined me. In addition, the residents had been given highly inflammatory and incorrect information. Their fears were unwarranted and become escalated through misrepresentation of the facts. There was never any discussion about realtors and developers needing the higher designation for any purpose. Connectivity and proper traffic flow is also very essential to preserving neighborhoods and equally important to our quality of life.

I am an advocate of larger family homes for the west side. We have an over abundance of starter homes over there. I've made it perfectly clear to all developers who have come before us that our goal is to have step-up housing in order to keep families there and to keep children in the schools. I don't agree that creating a new ordinance with a minimum house size is the right solution. The ordinance not only asked for the minimum house size for the west side, but it also had city-wide impact. That meant no one in Provo could build a house under 1,800 sq. ft. That is just too much government control in our lives. What if you could only afford to build a 1,500 sq. ft. home on your piece of property? I prefer to look at the house size issue on a project to project basis. After hearing all the pros and cons, I believe we should keep the flexibility in order to do trade-offs, to ensure we have affordable housing in Provo and keep our options open as the market dictates. Almost all of the projects that have been approved on the West side recently have exceeded the 1,800 sq ft. mark. In hindsight, we now see the Real Estate market has flattened a bit and if we had an ordinance in place that developers had to hold to we would be hard pressed to have any development in the city. I would also like to clarify a point that was made. I don't have a "connection" to Kevin Call. He sends his opinions and recommendations and voices disfavor or acceptance to all of us on the Council. I believe Provo City is better served by the "no" vote on the minimum house size issue.

My opponent is very misguided on the subject of Pride in Provo. She wasn't there, she didn't participate, and she certainly must not have heard the project's thorough and glowing evaluation. I invite you to read the Pride in Provo section on this web-site. Read newspaper articles about PIP and the minutes of our study meeting when we did our evaluation. The Council voted unanimously to support PIP for two years and promised in the future if any neighborhood wants to come forward and support a Pride in Provo project with a grass roots effort, they will be happy to appropriate the money. PIP empowered neighbors to take control and help improve their neighborhoods. It was the "perfect" example of less government. We got more bang for our federal grant dollars by leveraging it with private funds. PIP invested more in a neighborhood and made a larger impact than any other single project has. Neighborhood Housing Services have expressed an interest in administering the project. They are a non-profit organization and not government. PIP has great merit in helping neighborhoods get the government out by empowering them to help themselves with or without federal grant funding. Ask anyone who was really involved and you'll hear a very different story.

During my campaign I made a point that I didn't, and still don't, have any personal agendas or axes to grind. I simply don't have a conflict of interest in serving the city. We encourage people to run for office from all walks of life. I realize that Council members occasionally do have conflicts of interests because of various affiliations or workings with the city for example, Steve Turley developed a piece of property next to his home that he had been working on long before he was ever on the Council. Actions from a previous Council stopped his project by changing the zone mid-project before he was able to get final approval. Mr. Turley, as a Council Member disclosed all important and necessary information, had his wife represent the project, and actually left the council chambers for the rest of us to vote. I believe a Council Member has the right to make a living and the law provides provisions where a person can disclose any conflicts and disengage in the process, which is what Mr. Turley did.

I did suggest that iProvo be put to a public vote, but my recommendation met with no success. I decided then to call as many constituents as possible to solicit their opinions. I called or spoke to approximately 1,200 citizens, did extensive research, and took everything into account when I voted. Two-thirds of those called and polled were clearly in favor of my voting for iProvo. We do have a representative government in Provo, and I do my best to listen to my constituents and study all issues to make the best decision I possibly can at any given moment. I did let constituents speak; I listened and voted accordingly. I don’t think we can ask more from an elected official than for them to work hard and do their best.

I am in favor of open government, not back room deals. I will always voice my concern when I feel processes are misused and not open for all council members and/or the public. For the record, I feel the position of the Municipal Council's Executive Director is a very important and critical position. Any position of that caliber should have required an open search. The hiring of all other city department head positions is conducted that way. Why shouldn't the Council follow the same sound policy? I feel strongly about proper procedures and good policy decisions. I believe that being a peacemaker and a team player means exactly that – and it goes both ways. I have experienced first-hand occasions when if I did not vote as some members on the Council thought that I should, I was ostracized and even excluded from important information and discussions. Proper processes have sometimes been circumvented to affect political outcomes. Politics are alive and well in Provo! My first priority is to my constituents, not to be "most popular" amongst my council colleagues. I consider myself a quite friendly and affable person, and I do esteem my colleagues on the council. We do, however, disagree on occasion, and we vote differently, but I consider that a healthy process. That is why we have seven members. I believe free, independent thinking of seven good people brings about the best solutions and policies.