Steve Turley’s voting record:
Mar 2004: Had to recuse himself from voting on a Pro-Zone redevelopment on 5200 N University Avenue.
May 2004: Voted against appointing an auditor to conduct an independent audit of the city.
May 2004: Voted against the creation of the Utah Central Business Economic Development District.
November 2004: Voted for a resolution opening 300 North between 900 East and Seven Peaks Boulevard.
January 2004: Voted for rezoning 19 acres of land at 5485 N 250 West from Agricultural to Public Facilities.
April 2004: Voted against an ordinance amending the Provo City Code to adopt minimum standards for various types of airport operations and activities.
June 2004: Voted against authorizing the Mayor to adopt regulations governing Freedom Festival Parades.
July 2004: Voted against strengthening minimum parking requirements for rental dwellings.
September 2004: Voted against an amendment to the Minimum Parking requirements regarding rental dwellings.
October 2004: Abstained from voting on the update of Provo City School Board Districts to reapportion school district boundaries.
December 2004: Voted against an amendment to the Provo City Code which amended the definition of kitchen and repeal of “wet bar and snack bar.” 7th Sept.
December 7th, 2004: Voted against an ordinance amending section 14.34.440 regarding location and number of kitchens permitted in one-family dwellings and accessory buildings.
February 3rd, 2004: Voted against purchasing 398 East 400 South (Maeser) for the purchase rehabilitation program.
March 2nd, 2004: Abstained from voting for the purchase of 412 West 500 South for the purchase rehabilitation program using Central Neighborhood Revitalization Revolving Funds. (Franklin)
April 6th, 2004: Voted against purchasing 371 North 400 West (Dixon) for the purchase-rehabilitation program.
April 20th, 2004: Voted against purchasing 368 North 400 East, and 444 East 400 North for the purchase rehabilitation program or a future park for the Joaquin neighborhood.
May 4th, 2004: Voted against purchasing 398 East 400 South (Maeser) using Central Neighborhood Revitalization Revolving Funds.
May 4th, 2004: Voted against appropriating $135,000 from the Rental Rehabilitation fund to purchase and rehabilitate property at 386 North 400 East (Joaquin)
September 21st, 2004: Voted against using Central Neighborhood Revitalization Revolving Funds to purchase and rehabilitate 591 West 300 North (Dixon)
October 5th, 2004: Voted against funding the purchase and rehabilitation of 510 and 532 South 400 West (Franklin)
November 23rd, 2004: Voted against using Central Neighborhood Revitalization Revolving Funds to purchase 258 East 300 North for the Purchase and Rehabilitation program.
November 23rd, 2004: Voted against a resolution to submit an application to HUD (Housing and Urban Development) for participation in the Asset Control Area Program.
January 18th, 2005: Recused himself from voting on a zone change from RC to R3 (Medium Multiple Residential) for 8.2 acres of property at 826 East 950 South (Spring Creek)
January 18th, 2005: Voted against appointing John Borget and Dave Knecht to the Taxing Entity Committee for all redevelopment, economic development, and education housing development project areas in the city. (6 to 1)
January 18th, 2005: Voted against a resolution adopting a municipal council meeting schedule for 2005
February 15th, 2005: Voted against appointing Terry A. Harward as Executive Director of the City Council.
April 5th, 2005: Voted against approving the Home Program, the American Dream Down-Payment Initiative, and the Community Development Block Grant Program for the 2005-2006 Fiscal Year.
May 3rd, 2005: Voted against a resolution approving the 2005 Five Year Consolidated Plan.
2005: Voted against changing the General Plan Designation on 200 North from Collector road to a neighborhood street.
June 21st, 2005: Voted against the 2005-2006 Budget Resolution
October 11th, 2005: Abstained from voting on a resolution amending the Provo City General Plan which amended key land use policies for property located generally along the west side of South State Street from 1140 South to 1860 South.
December 20th, 2005: voted against a resolution accepting the annual audit and audit report.
January 4th, 2005: Voted against authorizing a loan from the Central Neighborhood Revitalization Revolving Fund to NHS for rehabilitation expenses on 356 West 200 North.
January 4th, 2005: Voted against a grant of $75,750 from HOME funds to the rural housing development corporation for upgrading the exterior of 12 single family homes to be constructed on the Maeser School site. The funds were to add brick, or fiber-cement siding to the homes, to make them blend into the neighborhood’s existing homes.
March 1st, 2005: Voted against using Central Neighborhood Revitalization Funds to allow NHS to purchase and rehabilitate a home located at 746 East 200 North. (Joaquin)
March 1st, 2005: Voted against a resolution approving the purchase and resale of a house at 1045 West 300 North for the purchase rehabilitation program.
June 21st, 2005: Voted against the annual budget resolution for the Redevelopment Agency for the 2005-2006 fiscal year.
July 19th, 2005: Voted against the use of Central Neighborhood Revitalization Revolving funds to purchase and rehabilitate 704 West 400 North (Dixon)
December 20th, 2005: Voted against the use of Central Neighborhood Revitalization Revolving Funds to purchase and rehabilitate 541 East 300 North. (Joaquin)
June 20th 2006: Voted against the 2006 Action Plan for submittal to HUD (Housing and Urban Development).
February 7th, 2006: Voted against rezoning 2.23 acres of property at 3620 North Canyon Road from Agricultural to R1.10 (Single Family Homes with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet.)
April 18th, 2006: Voted against enacting temporary zoning regulations to limit lot coverage in one-family residential, and residential conservation zones.
August 8th, 2006: Voted against an ordinance which required zoning disclosures be provided during residential property transfers and leases.
February 21st, 2006: Voted against a resolution authorizing the Executive Committee of the Redevelopment Agency to approve the purchase and sale or purchase & rehabilitation of properties.
July 18th, 2006: Voted against using Congressional Grant funds (Economic development initiative) to provide Neighborhood Housing Services with the money to acquire and redevelop property located at 631, 637 & 659 East 350 North. (Joaquin Neighborhood)
March 21st, 2006: Voted against a resolution approving the HOME program, the American Dream Down-payment Initiative, and the Community Development Block Grant Program for the 2006-2007 Fiscal Year.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
TO BE OR NOT TO BE A POLITICIAN
About two dozen people have told me that if I'm going to get involved with politics, I have to become a politician. In other words, I have to stop saying what I think, and start saying things that make people feel good. I must not be too negative, or too technical, or too honest. If I want to get elected, I have to tell warm fuzzy stories, and make claims about myself that may or may not be accurate, and adjust my message depending on the audience that I am addressing.
What I want to know is, IS THAT TRUE? Are voters no more discerning than to vote for a smile, or an anecdote, and an overblown promise?
I can't accept that. I want to believe that people are responsible citizens. I trust that they will actually determine whether or not a candidate is someone with whom they agree. I hope that they will pay attention to the issues and the voting records and the facts.
For my part, I am going to continue to say exactly what I think. If you agree with me, I'd like your vote. Please read any or all of the articles below. I have been completely candid about my positions. I guess I am not much of a politician.
What I want to know is, IS THAT TRUE? Are voters no more discerning than to vote for a smile, or an anecdote, and an overblown promise?
I can't accept that. I want to believe that people are responsible citizens. I trust that they will actually determine whether or not a candidate is someone with whom they agree. I hope that they will pay attention to the issues and the voting records and the facts.
For my part, I am going to continue to say exactly what I think. If you agree with me, I'd like your vote. Please read any or all of the articles below. I have been completely candid about my positions. I guess I am not much of a politician.
Friday, September 7, 2007
BRIEF STATEMENTS OF MY POSITIONS
Several people have asked me to post a brief statement of my positions and proposals about various important issues. These are the basics...
HOME OWNERSHIP -- Home ownership is the foundation of a healthy city, but Provo’s ratio of owner-occupied homes to rental homes is seriously out of balance, even for a university town. Every reasonable effort should be made to increase owner-occupancy. I support the Council’s recent actions in this effort, and will vote to expand them.
ZONING ENFORCEMENT -- It’s the law. If it no longer meets the needs of the neighborhood, the law should be changed, not ignored or circumvented. Provo needs an amendment to the recent caretaker ordinance that would allow our seniors, widows, and disabled residents to have a legal basement apartment. I will demand that all homes that receive city money be legally occupied.
DEVELOPMENT -- Provo has done much to “raise the bar” to promote good development, including development agreements, the PRO zone, and enforcing parking standards. I agree with those measures. But more needs to be done, especially on the west side. Infrastructure (roads, sewers, storm drains, sidewalks, parks, etc.) needs to be in place for anticipated growth. “Holes in the program”, which cost developers unnecessarily, need to be filled. I will meet with developers to do that. I applaud those developers who have “hit the mark!”
BUDGET -- Policy-making begins with money-allocating. The Council has the responsibility to oversee, thoroughly, the Mayor’s budget, and by watching carefully where we spend our money, we could save more. I have several ideas on how to get the cash for needed programs, WITHOUT raising taxes!
AIRPORT -- Plans are in the works to make Provo’s airport a “regional facility.” The Airport Master Plan demonstrated the need for the expansion. But landowners around the airport have not been treated fairly, and the Council has not been informed completely of airport developments (including the cost of all off-site improvements.) I will seek appointment to the Airport Board.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS -- Why is Provo building streets and waterlines and parks in some areas of the city, and other areas, which are in much greater need, are going without necessary services? I will review the priorities of all of the CIP
Schedules. I believe the price of that infrastructure should be shared by developers, neighborhoods, and the entire community.
ENERGY DEPARTMENT -- We need a Performance Audit of each division within the Energy Department. Since Provo Power is a public utility, we are the stockholders. We need a better accounting of where the money is going.
GROWTH -- Provo’s General Plan is an inspired document. I will follow it. I will seek public discussion for the 2008 General Plan Update hearings about just how big Provo should get, and where it makes sense to put more development.
SUSTAINABILITY -- I will call for a “Sustainability Forecast” to see where Provo stands with regards to air quality, water conservation, traffic control, open space preservation, recycling participation, and watershed protection. The first step towards improvement is assessment. I will start these important discussions.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -- Business is essential. Government should not compete with private enterprise. The business community needs to organize a “grass-roots” commission that will advise the Council on all Economic Development issues. All members of the administration need to comply with the policies which the Council, the elected policy-making body, has outlined.
BALANCE OF GOVERNMENT -- Provo’s form of government has TWO separate and equal teams, who should check and balance each other, not rubber stamp decisions.
WORKING WITH OTHERS -- People with sound egos can handle conflict. I trust the other Council members and the Administration. And I’m not afraid of a little controversy. But I will not alienate anybody.
EMPOWERING CITIZENS -- Sympathy and a listening ear are not enough. A Council member has to educate residents with problems about where to go, what to do, and how to do it. The more people are involved, the better the outcome. If you call me with a problem, I will get you involved in the solution.
HOME OWNERSHIP -- Home ownership is the foundation of a healthy city, but Provo’s ratio of owner-occupied homes to rental homes is seriously out of balance, even for a university town. Every reasonable effort should be made to increase owner-occupancy. I support the Council’s recent actions in this effort, and will vote to expand them.
ZONING ENFORCEMENT -- It’s the law. If it no longer meets the needs of the neighborhood, the law should be changed, not ignored or circumvented. Provo needs an amendment to the recent caretaker ordinance that would allow our seniors, widows, and disabled residents to have a legal basement apartment. I will demand that all homes that receive city money be legally occupied.
DEVELOPMENT -- Provo has done much to “raise the bar” to promote good development, including development agreements, the PRO zone, and enforcing parking standards. I agree with those measures. But more needs to be done, especially on the west side. Infrastructure (roads, sewers, storm drains, sidewalks, parks, etc.) needs to be in place for anticipated growth. “Holes in the program”, which cost developers unnecessarily, need to be filled. I will meet with developers to do that. I applaud those developers who have “hit the mark!”
BUDGET -- Policy-making begins with money-allocating. The Council has the responsibility to oversee, thoroughly, the Mayor’s budget, and by watching carefully where we spend our money, we could save more. I have several ideas on how to get the cash for needed programs, WITHOUT raising taxes!
AIRPORT -- Plans are in the works to make Provo’s airport a “regional facility.” The Airport Master Plan demonstrated the need for the expansion. But landowners around the airport have not been treated fairly, and the Council has not been informed completely of airport developments (including the cost of all off-site improvements.) I will seek appointment to the Airport Board.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS -- Why is Provo building streets and waterlines and parks in some areas of the city, and other areas, which are in much greater need, are going without necessary services? I will review the priorities of all of the CIP
Schedules. I believe the price of that infrastructure should be shared by developers, neighborhoods, and the entire community.
ENERGY DEPARTMENT -- We need a Performance Audit of each division within the Energy Department. Since Provo Power is a public utility, we are the stockholders. We need a better accounting of where the money is going.
GROWTH -- Provo’s General Plan is an inspired document. I will follow it. I will seek public discussion for the 2008 General Plan Update hearings about just how big Provo should get, and where it makes sense to put more development.
SUSTAINABILITY -- I will call for a “Sustainability Forecast” to see where Provo stands with regards to air quality, water conservation, traffic control, open space preservation, recycling participation, and watershed protection. The first step towards improvement is assessment. I will start these important discussions.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -- Business is essential. Government should not compete with private enterprise. The business community needs to organize a “grass-roots” commission that will advise the Council on all Economic Development issues. All members of the administration need to comply with the policies which the Council, the elected policy-making body, has outlined.
BALANCE OF GOVERNMENT -- Provo’s form of government has TWO separate and equal teams, who should check and balance each other, not rubber stamp decisions.
WORKING WITH OTHERS -- People with sound egos can handle conflict. I trust the other Council members and the Administration. And I’m not afraid of a little controversy. But I will not alienate anybody.
EMPOWERING CITIZENS -- Sympathy and a listening ear are not enough. A Council member has to educate residents with problems about where to go, what to do, and how to do it. The more people are involved, the better the outcome. If you call me with a problem, I will get you involved in the solution.
PIP--PRIDE IN PROVO
The PIP program was the "brain child" of my opponent, Midge Johnson. It was a worthy project. Many neighbors gave valuable service. Much good work was done in the Provost and Carterville Neighborhoods. But the program had some fundamental flaws.
1. It was redundant. The Neighborhood Housing Service (NHS) was already doing this work. (The "Paint Your Heart Out" program has had great success in several neighborhoods for many years.) The Timpanogos Community Network (TCN) already brings together neighborhood, church, business, and student groups to accomplish large-scale service projects anytime they are asked. Provo's Neighborhood Program has "matching grant" money available every year for such projects. PIP re-invented the wheel.
2. It was not the best use of tax dollars. After the 2005 project, a woman came to the Council to thank them. She stated," We could have afforded a new roof, but thanks to Provo City, we got one for free!" Is that really the best use of tax dollars?
3. It had no legal occupancy requirements. Several of the homes that were refurbished have illegal basement apartments. In a neighborhood that is zoned for single-family residences ONLY, it is NOT appropriate to be painting and repairing homes that are violating the law.
4. It was not necessary. Midge even called the project "a face-lift for the neighborhood." Last time I checked, face-lifts were considered elective surgery.
5. It was ineffective.. The projects DID make the neighborhood look better, but studies have shown that the only factor which really affects the health and stability of a neighborhood is home-ownership. Only programs which genuinely increase home-ownership have any lasting value. No follow-up was ever done to see if owner-occuoancy was increased by PIP.
6. It took money from the programs proven to increase home-ownership.
7. PIP was too big. PIP did not survive. The Council voted to cease funding it, when it became clear to everyone, including Midge, that the program had to have staff to administer it.
What needs to occur is that the existing programs that are available to the 5 Central Neighborhoods (the CNRCC)-- the rehab loans, the down-payment loans, the service projects, the historical restoration grants, etc., need to be expanded to include several other neighborhoods -- Foothills (east of 900 E. and north of Center St.), Provost (east of 900 E. and south of Center St.) and North Park (west of 500 W. and north of 500 N.) I intend to take care of that.
1. It was redundant. The Neighborhood Housing Service (NHS) was already doing this work. (The "Paint Your Heart Out" program has had great success in several neighborhoods for many years.) The Timpanogos Community Network (TCN) already brings together neighborhood, church, business, and student groups to accomplish large-scale service projects anytime they are asked. Provo's Neighborhood Program has "matching grant" money available every year for such projects. PIP re-invented the wheel.
2. It was not the best use of tax dollars. After the 2005 project, a woman came to the Council to thank them. She stated," We could have afforded a new roof, but thanks to Provo City, we got one for free!" Is that really the best use of tax dollars?
3. It had no legal occupancy requirements. Several of the homes that were refurbished have illegal basement apartments. In a neighborhood that is zoned for single-family residences ONLY, it is NOT appropriate to be painting and repairing homes that are violating the law.
4. It was not necessary. Midge even called the project "a face-lift for the neighborhood." Last time I checked, face-lifts were considered elective surgery.
5. It was ineffective.. The projects DID make the neighborhood look better, but studies have shown that the only factor which really affects the health and stability of a neighborhood is home-ownership. Only programs which genuinely increase home-ownership have any lasting value. No follow-up was ever done to see if owner-occuoancy was increased by PIP.
6. It took money from the programs proven to increase home-ownership.
7. PIP was too big. PIP did not survive. The Council voted to cease funding it, when it became clear to everyone, including Midge, that the program had to have staff to administer it.
What needs to occur is that the existing programs that are available to the 5 Central Neighborhoods (the CNRCC)-- the rehab loans, the down-payment loans, the service projects, the historical restoration grants, etc., need to be expanded to include several other neighborhoods -- Foothills (east of 900 E. and north of Center St.), Provost (east of 900 E. and south of Center St.) and North Park (west of 500 W. and north of 500 N.) I intend to take care of that.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE --"OVER THE LINE"
Provo's population is largely LDS. The Church encourages all its members to get involved in politics, but it does not endorse any candidate or party, and it does not allow its meetinghouses, events, or resources to be used in a campaign for political office.
Four years ago, at a Stake picnic, I introduced myself to people, mentioning that I was a candidate for City Council. That was a mistake. My ecclesiastical leader reminded me of the Church's position, and I ceased doing anything like it, afterwards.
I have been extra-cautious during this campaign. Since becoming a candidate, I have refrained from talking politics at any church function. If anyone else initiates the conversation, I politely explain "I don't talk politics at church." One brother did tell me about the chicken running around in his neighborhood, and asked about the law pertaining to livestock in residential areas, but other than that, I have been assiduous.
I have NOT talked politics at church. I have NOT used the stake list to make calls.
Such behavior is "over the line". I suggest that all the candidates be very careful.
Four years ago, at a Stake picnic, I introduced myself to people, mentioning that I was a candidate for City Council. That was a mistake. My ecclesiastical leader reminded me of the Church's position, and I ceased doing anything like it, afterwards.
I have been extra-cautious during this campaign. Since becoming a candidate, I have refrained from talking politics at any church function. If anyone else initiates the conversation, I politely explain "I don't talk politics at church." One brother did tell me about the chicken running around in his neighborhood, and asked about the law pertaining to livestock in residential areas, but other than that, I have been assiduous.
I have NOT talked politics at church. I have NOT used the stake list to make calls.
Such behavior is "over the line". I suggest that all the candidates be very careful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)