Opposed to The Mountain Accord? Time to Stop Focusing On the Tunnel.
Listening to Lynn Ware Peak this morning on KPCW it became clear that people in opposition to Mountain Accord need to change their strategy.
The image that is being painted by media and politicians is that the only reason people don’t like Mountain Accord is because they are focusing on the tunnel between Brighton and Park City. Ms Peak effectively said that people opposed to the Mountain Accord don’t see the great things in the economic, environmental, or recreation parts of the blueprint. Liza Simpson, Park City City Council member, put up the straw man argument (on KPCW) that it seems if you’re for the Mountain Accord then you’ve drank the Kool-aid. She takes personal offense at “the Kool-aid” statements because she grew up knowing Jim Jones or something. Therefore, if you’re against the Mountain Accord, you are an insensitive bast**d.
The point is that the Mountain Accord, who has been on the defensive for the last month or so, is striking back. If you don’t like the Mountain Accord for any number of reasons like lack of transparency, conflicts of interest, impact on Park City’s economy, you believe it will add growth in the Wasatch, you’re opposed to special benefits to ski resorts, etc. … you “actually” don’t like the Mountain Accord because of the tunnel between Brighton and Park City.
You and your opinion are getting marginalized because … You are narrow minded. You are on the level with a Climate Denier or an Obama “Birther.” You are a nut. Well, maybe not quite a nut, but at least naive.
This is a standard tactic. The problem is that the message is controlled by those with money and access to the media. The solution is to think and research things for yourself… and then hold people accountable. Just because a voice on KPCW tells you something, it’s not necessarily true. Just because your elected officials have a position, it doesn’t mean you need to agree with it. In Summit County, Council member Chris Robinson effectively asked fellow council member Claudia McMullin, “Isn’t there something that would make you want to stick with the Accord?” So when you hear Mr. Robinson advocate staying in the Mountain Accord, there is some motivation there. He obviously thinks there is a carrot that will benefit some or all of Summit County if we stick with it.
Frankly, we don’t know what that carrot is. We don’t know what the carrot is for anyone for or against the Mountain Accord. Mr Robinson may be right. Perhaps there is a light at the end of the tunnel so great that no matter the cost, we’d be willing to support the Mountain Accord. Or maybe it’s something that means absolutely nothing. There-in lies the problem. We are only left with trust. However, I don’t see any other option. We as citizens will never have the knowledge that Mr. Robinson has about the game being played. Therefore, we can only judge him and our fellow city and county council members on outcomes.
In my mind, the tunnel is now theirs to own. In the words of Steven King in his book Pet Semetary… “It’s your cat now” Park City and Summit County leaders. Our leaders are playing a dangerous game of continuing to fund Mountain Accord while claiming that we will have “exit ramps” to ensure that Park City and Summit County are not impacted negatively by Mountain Accord. So, if that tunnel is included in the “preferred” NEPA alternative (the best option provided to the EPA by Mountain Accord), it will likely be built. If that happens, it’s our elected representatives who are responsible for it. They own it. Their names and reputations should be associated with the results.
Regardless, those people in opposition to the Mountain Accord need to stop focusing on the tunnel and move on to other aspects. The tunnel is out of your hands and to focus on it, just marginalizes your arguments. You need to decide whether you want your local governments to continue down the path of spending money for recreation, environmental protections, and economic benefits on the front side of the Wasatch or not. You need to decide whether you are in favor of the Mountain Accord…sans the tunnel. It’s truly time to become educated on what it all means.
The game is truly afoot.
The Old Cock and Thumb
I was having dinner with a friend last night when talk shifted to Mountain Accord. She doesn’t really follow the Accord closely but asked me if I thought “this whole tunnel nonsense” was really just the “old cock and thumb.” I gave her that look that says, “I don’t know what you are talking about but that doesn’t sound quite … normal?”.
Evidently on the season premiere of HBO’s Veep, Julia Louis-Dreyfus’ character (the President) uses a negotiating technique called the “Cock and Thumb” to try and get what she wants. She needs to cut the military budget so she proposes something so extreme it would castrate the military, knowing that when they finally settle, they’ll be glad that only their thumb was cut off.
I don’t know if that’s quite the reference I would have made, but it’s an interesting thought regarding the Mountain Accord. Ask for a multi-billion dollar tunnel through a mountain, connecting the Cottonwood Canyons to Park City, knowing that it’s never going to fly. Then come back after the public yells and screams, and say “how about we just do bus rapid transit over the road to connect Brighton to Park City.” I can hear people saying, “wow, that sounds a lot better than a tunnel. We should do that.” Then if we oppose that idea too, we come off as completely negative — like we are irrational and won’t agree to anything.
Even if that sounds a little outrageous, how about what’s already happened. Let’s say Mountain Accord had only proposed changes in the Cottonwood Canyons. There was no connection to Park City. Everything ended at Brighton. Nothing on this side of the mountain. Would Park City and Summit County have forked over hundreds of thousands of dollars to “have a seat at the table”? Probably not. Yet, by throwing in a tunnel and an irrational connection to Park City, the money flows. Even though we’ve made it clear that we don’t want a connection to the Little Cottonwoods Canyons and THERE WILL NEVER BE A TUNNEL OVER OUR DEAD BODIES, we are forced to stick with the process, and continue to pay … just in case. If that was the strategy, it’s positively brilliant.
I’m not sure that would still be considered a “cock and thumb,” but I’d guess this tactic is described by a saying as equally vulgar.
Is There an Obsessesion With Tunnels?
A Friend of the Park Rag sent through an interesting document from 2006, that discusses transportation options in Little Cottonwood Canyon. I find two things truly interesting in the document. First, many of the same players who are part of the Mountain Accord now were part of this study then, namely Lochner and Fehr & Peers. Second, they considered building a tunnel from the base of Little Cottonwood Canyon to Alta, to enable cars to drive underground the whole way and avoid avalanches.
So, in 2006 it was an 8 mile tunnel from the base of the canyon to Alta. In 2015, it’s a tunnel from Brighton to Park City. It sounds like either every project today has to have a tunnel, someone important majored in tunnels at school, someone has a vested interest in building tunnels, or Summit County, Salt Lake City, and UTAH have SO MUCH MONEY that the “Cadillac” option is always presented.
For sure, though, it’s safe saying the more things change the more they stay the same.
h/t to A Friend of the Park Rag who pointed us to the story from 2006.
Just How Many Consultants are on the Mountain Accord?
In response to our article on the Mountain Accord Blueprint, a reader sent an email with the subject: Full Employment Act for Consultants. I thought the person was joking but then looked at an attachment that was included. I’m not laughing any more.
Here appear to be the outside consultants, as listed in various system groups, on the Mountain Accord project. It seems to be a who’s who of local consulting expertise.
Laynee Jones – Program Manager
Jeff Heilman – Parametrix
Krissy Nielsen – Technical Support
Loretta Markham – System Group Coordinator
Jim Carter – Technical Support
Nadine Fogarty – Technical Support
Buck Swaney – Technical Support
Andrea Clayton – Technical Lead
Stacey Aren – Technical Support — Water
Reid Persing – Technical Support — Ecosystems
Adrien Elseroad – Technical Support — Ecosystems
Elisa Albury – Technical Support — Land
Dave Shannon – Technical Support — Air Quality
Judy Dorsey – Technical Support — Climate Change
John Nepstad – Technical Lead
Jason Phillips – Technical Support
Kevin Rauhe – Technical Support
Sarah Nelson – Technical Support
Mike Grass – Fundraising
I realize that most projects require a little outside help, but wow! I also realize that most of these people aren’t the $20 per hour sort of people — maybe add a zero to that.
While I initially scoffed a bit at the email subject, I think the person is dead on with their “full employment analysis.” As they say, it’s a good gig if you can get it. As a former consultant, back in the hey-day of the profession, this would have been a dream job. If you are a partner with one of the firms involved, it’s just like gravy dripping from the bird. If I were them, I would want to drag this on as long as possible. There’s nothing better than a government contract, accountable to no one, that has no defined conclusion. Cha Ching.
It’s things like this that remind me that I’m in the wrong profession.
Here is the source material , in case you are interested.
h/t to the reader who sent this through. I couldn’t produce the Park Rag without help from you great community members. Thanks for the help.
in Development
Park City Day School Wants to Expand in Pinebrook
On Tuesday, April 28th the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission will hold a public hearing regarding expanding Park City Day School, in Pinebrook. The School wants to add a 5,500 square foot addition, located on the east side of the building, with six class rooms, a restroom and associated circulation.
My concern would stems from additional traffic on the frontage road by Fresh Market. Six classrooms with 15 kids likely mean about 80-100 more cars on the road. Perhaps the school has thought of a way to mitigate the issue.
Likewise, I wonder how this fits into the proposed General Plan Phase 2 where no new entitlements will be allowed (if that piece is approved by the County Council). Perhaps this is a little bit different since it is a conditional use permit application that may have already been contemplated.
If you have concerns, you may want to attend the Planning Committee Meeting and voice those:
Tuesday April 28, 2015 Beginning at 6:00 p.m.
Sheldon Richins Building (Summit County Library)
1885 W Ute Blvd.
Park City, Utah 84098
in Weather
NOAA Forecast Predicts Hot and Wet Summer
The NOAA makes long term forecasts for temperature and precipitation. While, by definition, forecasts aren’t perfect it does give some indication of what the weather service believes will happen.
In Utah’s case it appears June, July, and August are predicted to be above the mean temperature and have above the mean amount of the precipitation. If their forecast holds true, then hopefully the increased fire danger will be offset by increased precipitation.
in Dogs
The Park City Area has 66% LESS Dog Bites Than Average America
Over the past few years, the Park City and Summit County governments have been trying to figure out what to do about off-leash dogs. People see many dogs off-leash on our trails and then hear about dog bites around town and reason that off leash dogs are the cause of the problem.
I reached out to Summit County Animal Control to understand how many dog bites there were in 2014. They promptly responded that Summit County had 129 dog bites last year. I was taken aback because I would never have guessed that there were that many bites in our county. Yet sometimes numbers are misleading. I decided to research dog bites nationwide. According to a CDC study, there are approximately 4.5 million dog bites per year. That means about 1.5% percent of the US population is bitten each year.
Yet in Summit County that number is about 0.4% of the population. So, we are at about 1/3 of the national average . If this were burglaries or murder we would be celebrating our achievements. Yet with dogs, the narrative of Summit County being overrun by wild dogs seems to have overtaken the truth.
I don’t mean to make light of dog bites. I know even one dog bite is too many. The fear that victims have experienced must be extreme and I hope it never happens to me. That said, we are doing far better than average.
Yet, we as a community have seemed to correlate increased off-leash dogs with dog bites. If anything, if there are more off-leash dogs around Park City than average, then the correlation seems to demonstrate that more off-leash dogs leads to less dog bites.
So, I’m not sure there is actually an issue, relative to the populace as a whole. After getting the numbers, I am actually convinced that we are doing better than most. If our off-leash dog population decreased to the national average, would it decrease dog bites or would we revert to the mean (3 times as many dog bites)?
What I do know is that loose correlations based on what we think we see are often wrong. Perhaps initiatives like the Yellow Dog Project would be more successful at stopping dog bites than more leashes. Perhaps alternate days on certain trails (i.e. dogs both on and off-leash on even days and bikes and humans on odd days) would lower our dog bites. Perhaps exorbitant fines and restitution would make owners think twice about their aggressive dogs.
We don’t know.
What we do know is that we don’t, compared to others, have a problem. Could we reduce dog bites through government initiatives? Maybe. Is the answer proven to be cracking down on off-leash animals? Not by a long shot. Will cracking down make the problem worse? We’ll see.
We’ve found the Blueprint for Mountain Accord
Did you think the Mountain Accord came from nowhere — that it was a product of immaculate conception. Naively, I guess I did. I envisioned a group of people sitting around a table throwing out ideas. Arguing. Agreeing. Compromising. Then finally devising a solution to our watershed issues in the Wasatch.
However, recently I was searching for some stats on the number of people who use Little Cottonwood Canyon. Imagine my surprise when I came upon a document entitled MTS Report Final. It’s a document from 2012, paid for by Salt Lake County, and prepared by Fehr & Peers and Lochner. What does the document describe? Everything I’ve read about transportation related to Mountain Accord. Does it have trains? Yes. Does it have a tunnel from Brighton to PCMR? Yes. Does it even describe where that tunnel starts and stops. You bet it does.
It is so complete that you wonder why they even did the Mountain Accord. Couldn’t they have just said, “Salt Lake County has come up with a plan. Summit County, we’d like you to agree to it.”? How complete is it? The transport time via rail from Brighton to Park City is estimated at 10-30 minutes. The cost from Brighton to Park City is estimated at at $730 million to $960 million. Wait, I thought we didn’t know costs?
To be fair, there are a number of different concepts presented including Bus, Bus Rapid Transit, Rail, and Aerial (gondola). Yet, everything we have heard at Mountain Accord meetings parrots the Salt Lake County plan. There are over 144 pages with details. As we readily admit, we aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed, so Park Rag readers, as you read this document let us know what we missed and what Summit County citizens should digest from this document. Please email me with any thoughts you have and the Park Rag will make sure your opinions are heard.
To us, after reading this document, it seems the Mountain Accord is an attempt to co-opt local governments, local organizations, and local people into Salt Lake County’s view of the future. They wrap this in the thinly cloaked veil of protecting our watershed. Our questions are, which interests are really being served by Mountain Accord, and given how dirty this all feels, do we really want to be a part of it?
We’ll leave you with a couple of charts from the MTS Document and a little commentary:
In Salt Lake County’s lowest-growth estimate (first chart), the number of vehicles in Little Cottonwood Canyon will grow by a total of 10% by 2030 (15 years from now). In the second chart, it shows growth over the last 12 years at about a total of 2%. So even their most conservative estimate isn’t likely conservative enough. Unless, of course, Mountain Accord can get that train going up Little Cottonwood with a tunnel to Park City, which will help Salt Lake County meet their apparent goal of filling up every last inch of the Wasatch with people.
At least we now know exactly which game we are playing.
Cognitive Dissonance in Summit County Government Over Mountain Accord
Yesterday on KPCW, Lynn Ware Peak interviewed Summit County Manager Tom Fisher. She asked a question about Mountain Accord:
Tom Fisher (Summit County Manager): “You know I think there is certainly a lot of conversation about that, and the [Summit County] Council is leaning toward that. We’ll have further discussion about that as the next couple of months move on. In my personal view, its very important if someone is planning for our area, we need to be at the table, participating in that planning, so we represent ourselves.”
In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values. I think this describes the Summit County Council and County Manager to a tee. They know what the people want, yet they can’t even say it.
What I would have liked Mr Fisher to say is “I know that most citizens who have followed the Mountain Accord in Summit County are against it. Yet, they may not understand the implications of bowing out of the Accord. This could impact our roads, our access to other state services, and how members of the legislature may punish Summit County for leaving the Mountain Accord process. Therefore, while we don’t like the Mountain Accord any more than you do, we must stay in it for the common good.”
Instead we get platitudes like “keeping a seat at the table.”
Please just treat us as grown ups and tell us the truth. We can handle it.
The Grapes of Wrath … Park City Style
I love the taste of dirt in the afternoon:
Parkrag
We believe in citizen journalism. We believe there are stories to tell that can help to shape our community for the better. We believe tomorrow's Park City can be better than today's.