MIDGE'S "FACTS"

All elected officials should be held accountable for what they do while in public office. Midge Johnson recently published an article on her website called "Facts on Attacks." While I am glad that Midge has finally explained her votes on these issues, once again, I see discrepancies in some of her claims:

She says:
1."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."

FACT: I have NOT made any assumptions about the motives behind her votes. In the article below, called, "Midge Johnson's Voting Record", I quoted WHAT SHE CLAIMED to believe, reported HOW SHE ACTUALLY VOTED, and asked her to EXPLAIN HER MOTIVES. I do not believe I have "attacked" her. Claiming to have been "attacked" in order to accuse an "attacker" is a very manipulative technique.

2."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. 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."

FACT: Over 50 violations of the zoning code existed in the area that was under consideration for the A-Overlay change. Of course neighbors were upset. Some were upset that others were breaking the law, impacting the neighborhood and devaluing their property. Others were upset that they might lose their income-generating apartments. Midge contacted people on BOTH SIDES and warned them that what I was doing might harm them. She told people that I owned property in the proposal area, and would benefit personally by a zone change. That was untrue. My lawyer had to contact her and ask her to stop telling people this untruth.

The issue ended when the neighborhood weighed in, 2 to 1, AGAINST the zone change. But no action has been taken in four years to solve the problem of the many illegal apartments. Midge's solution? She painted them. She got $150k of the federal CDBG money for PIP, and painted and roofed and landscaped homes, including ones with illegal basement apartments. She shouldn't have.

3. "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."

FACT: As land use chair for a full year, Midge set the agenda. She could have done a great deal more than 'welcome the opportunity to revisit the issue.' She hasn't.

4."I believe the current system of enforcement by complaint is adequate."

FACT: No, it isn't. The numerous violations continue, and they are increasing.

5. "I believe a stronger, more forceful, random policing of homes would be seen as unfavorable throughout the city."

FACT: How the zoning ordinances are "SEEN" does not change the fact that they are the LAW, and should be enforced.

6. "It is impossible for the city to know of many violations unless reported by our good citizens...The city has a heavy burden of proof, and it is very difficult to gather enough evidence to prevail in court."

FACT: Either the burden of proof is on the neighbors ("Enforcement by complaint is adequate"), or it is on the city ("stronger, more forceful enforcement would be ...unfavorable"). Which does Midge favor? In her previous response, she indicated that "pitting neighbor against neighbor" was a bad thing. Now she says it is necessary. Which does she believe?

The FACT is that the reason NO ONE is enforcing the law, is that EVERYONE is waiting for SOMEONE ELSE to do it. Midge has had four years to demonstrate the political will to do ANYTHING about the growing problem, and she has failed.

I AM WILLING to do the hard things and make the difficult decisions necessary to preserve our city. The burden of proof should be shared by ALL stakeholders, including realtors, homeowners associations, and property management companies, who, if they knowingly violate the law, should be fined, heavily.

7. "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... Expert testimony by staff and transportation officials supported my vote and the three others who joined me...Connectivity and proper traffic flow is also very essential to preserving neighborhoods and equally important to our quality of life."

FACT: 200 North should never have been designated as a collector road. That designation was made years ago, but no one in the neighborhoods realized it had been done. When I brought it to their attention, after reviewing the Street Capital Improvement Plan, the public became involved in the discussion for the first time.

If Midge believes, as she stated previously, that "I am for neighborhoods choosing what they want their neighborhoods to be like," why did she instead listen to, and side with, the engineering staff and traffic officials? Of those neighbors who opposed the re-designation of the street through their neighborhood, Midge dismissed them as "C.A.V.E. people-- Citizen's Against Virtually Everything."

8. "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."

FACT: Kevin Call, formerly head of the Utah County Board of Realtors, invites candidates to come and address their legislative committee during every election. This year they invited every candidate except me. When I called and asked if Kevin Call was going to hold another candidate panel, which I could attend, he said, "No that won't be necessary. Midge is our candidate."

Midge's brother, Bill Brown, is one of the largest realtors in Provo. She, herself, was at one time, by her own admission, "a real-estate professional."

9. "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."

FACT": I watched ALL the discussions on the funding of Pride in Provo. I did not participate in the service projects, however, since I fundamentally disagreed with the way they were funded. I also read the "glowing evaluations." How could I help but do so, when Midge sent out almost a dozen press releases praising her own project. I suggest that you DO read that section of her website, and compare it to the news articles. Midge could have written them. On the day of the service project, she was directing the reporters about what to cover. They did not appreciate it.

10. "Ask anyone who was really involved and you'll hear a very different story." "

FACT: I did ask them. One person intimately involved with the project said, "It could never have succeeded. It was too large and unwieldly. I'm glad it did not continue." The other Council members evidently did not think enough of it to continue it.

11. "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."

FACT: No, nor apparently, any coherent policies or consistent positions. Midge's votes, according to another Council member, "are all over the place." I agree. She argues for one side one week, and then votes the other way. And she has not written a single piece of legislation in four years.

12: "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."

FACT: Steve Turley's initial foray into development may have been as Midge has presented. But Steve Turley has interest in other properties in Provo (near 4800 North, on South State Street), that will be impacted by decisions he has made, and may still make. Additionally, he tried to annex into Provo property he partially owns in Springville (the land behind Brand-X Burgers.) I was at the Planning Commission Meeting the night he asked Springville for a rezone of that property. He presented to the commission that his access to that property would be through Provo's Ironton project, a road that does not now exist, and may never exist as he drew it, depending on how Ironton develops. But he presented a road alignment to the Commission, showing it accessing his property. The Springville planning staffer said, "And Mr. Turley certainly knows what Provo is planning because of his position." I stood and reminded them that Mr. Turley could not speak for Provo City.

Midge needs to be careful whom she defends.

13. "I did suggest that iProvo be put to a public vote, but my recommendation met with no success."

FACT: Steve Turley, who opposed iProvo, made the motion to put iProvo on the ballot. Midge did not second that motion.

13: "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."

FACT: Midge suggested that the study sessions no longer be televised. She said, "It's hard to really discuss things the way we need to when we're on TV."

No, Midge, no. I know the real facts. The way you present yourself is still inconsistent with those facts. Nice try. No cigar.