(Salt Lake City) Mayor to Float Plaza Plan

The Salt Lake Tribune ^ | 12/6/2002 | HEATHER MAY

[Utah Girl]

Here is the LDS church's response to Rocky Anderson's proposals that he released earlier this afternoon. There is also a letter from H. David Burton, presiding Bishop. I'll also include a link to the complaints and incidents reports.

And one last comment from me. The Church Administration block has been open to the public for decades, and has allowed access through that area. The Main Street Plaza would be the same, allowing the public to walk through the area without a public easement. I do not understand why this is such a big issue with Rocky Anderson.

A CRITIQUE OF THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED TIME, PLACE AND MANNER RESTRICTIONS

1. No relation to the original bargain

- The mayor's proposal does not give the Church what it paid for. The parties to the 1999 transaction did not intend for there to be a free-speech corridor or protester bull pens on Church property, nor did they intend for the police to have to regulate harassment, intimidation, and noise levels on the plaza.

• Failure to protect the Plaza's serenity

- The mayor's proposal would not protect the peaceful atmosphere of the plaza, on which the Church has insisted from the beginning. Just the opposite:

• At both ends of the plaza, the mayor's plan would establish group demonstration areas for organized protests near the Church's religious buildings.
  
  
• On the remainder of easement, which would run the entire length of the plaza on its east side, individuals may protest, leaflet, solicit, preach and heckle.

3. Complicated and subjective

- The mayor's proposal is cumbersome, complicated, confusing, and highly subjective, with the result that it will be difficult or impossible to enforce. Just two examples:

• How would police know if a sound "annoys or disturbs reasonable persons with normal sensitivities" (See §14.50.140)
  
  
• What is an "unreasonable noise"? When can it be heard "in a private place"? (See §140.50.030) Who decides?

5. Future uncertainty

- A future city council could change these time, place, and manner restrictions to make them even more onerous without even asking the Church.

• The solution

- The mayor's plan is a complicated and unsatisfactory approach to the problem. We propose instead that the city give up the easement and that the Church allow continuous and perpetual public access to the plaza, in accordance with the parties' original bargain.

**************************************************
Letter to Mayor Anderson from H. David Burton, Presiding Bishop

December 6, 2002

To: Honorable Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson, Mayor; David Buhler, Chairman; Carlton J. Christensen, Vice-Chairman; Van Blair Turner; K. Eric Jergensen; Nancy Saxton; Jill Remington Love; and Dale Lambert

VIA HAND DELIVERY

City & County Building
451 South State Street, Rooms 304 & 306
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

Dear Mayor Anderson and Council Members:

This community needs your help. There is no question that the segment of Main Street sold to the Church for more than $8 million and developed by the Church into a beautiful mall connecting Temple Square and the Church administrative complex has become something neither the Church nor the city contemplated when they entered into the transaction in April 1999. Instead of a place of peace, the plaza has become a source of controversy and contention.

Ironically, the parties intended just the opposite. They wanted the plaza to be a beautiful place of quietude and contemplation, truly an oasis in the midst of a bustling city. What was intended as an enhancement of the quiet splendor of the Salt Lake Temple has now become a platform for hecklers harassing those visiting the temple, including young couples going there to be married, and a haven for others distributing anti-Church literature, "buttonholing" visitors or simply panhandling. Such behavior undermines the purpose of the plaza in direct contradiction of what the parties intended.

Mayor Anderson has now proposed an ordinance that would regulate the "time, place and manner" of such behavior on the easement. We believe that the Mayor's plan would lead to more - not less - controversy. Essentially, his proposal would codify the very activities on the plaza that the Church finds objectionable. Not only does it expressly permit organized protests and demonstrations in "bull pen" areas at either end of the plaza, but the ordinance also would allow all other forms of speech activity normally permitted on a public sidewalk on the rest of the easement. Sign-carrying, soliciting, street-preaching and even heckling would be permissible along the length and breadth of the easement, provided these activities remained within certain noise levels, did not obstruct the flow of foot traffic and complied with other ordinances regulating speech activities on a city sidewalk. And, realistically, how would these regulations governing an easement across the Church's property be enforced without a constant police presence, not to mention the continuing specter of potential disagreements between Church and city officials over the interpretation of the ordinance? This ordinance carries the seeds of ongoing confrontation, argument and strife - the very antithesis of the plaza. Such a pathway of controversy cannot be the road to peace.

We respectfully submit that there is a way to resolve this perplexing problem: The easement must be extinguished. The Church remains committed to working with the city to find a solution that assures public access to the plaza while keeping it free of contention. In point of fact, the Church has always intended that there be open public access to the plaza - with or without an "easement." As an additional gesture of good will, the Church is willing to agree that there will be no organized missionary proselyting on the plaza. It would be a quiet, welcoming sanctuary to all wishing to savor its serenity.

This matter is a community issue, and it deserves to be resolved by the community. The Church pledges its best efforts to finding such a resolution and invites you, as the elected representatives of the people of this community, to link arms with it in doing so. As always, we express our great appreciation to each and all of you for the service that you render.

Sincerely,

H. David Burton
Presiding Bishop
****************************************
Church Plaza protestors (video clips)
Plaza Incidents Report from Nov 27, 2002 to Nov 30, 2002
Sounds bites from Alan Sullivan, the LDS church's attorney

[JudyB1938]

Here's a little bump to the thread.

[restornu]

You know if that was a "Buddhist Temple or a Mosque" Rocky and the ACLU would be singing a different toon!

And send these disrupters packing!

[T. P. Pole]

Here's my idea. Take this so-called easement and wall it up, complete with a roof. This would give the passage agreed to. Then put in your own gate to the rest of the area, and restrict the passage there. Let anybody who wants it access to the tunnel, and preserve the peace elsewhere.

I guess that you'd have to build some kind of underpass or overpass to get across. Maybe an escalator to the second floor of the building across the street.

What do you all think?

[Utah Girl]

No, that defeats the purpose of the Main Street Plaza. It would cut off the Church administration block (where the Joseph Smith Memorial Building and Church Office building is.) I think the idea of an overpass is a good idea though. This is such a mess. I'm waiting for the late local news to come on.

[Utah Girl]

I just watched the late news. Pretty discouraging, they also showed part of a tape of a protestor using a megaphone, calling the early LDS church leaders whoremongers, etc. Nice, especially on the night that the Christmas lights were turned on Temple Square. Such a mess, Rocky needs to give it up. This is the report from KSL-TV this evening, on their late broadcast.
*******************************************
The mayor calls for a compromise, but his latest proposal to resolve the dispute over the Main Street Plaza looks like it, too, is headed for a dead end.

"No one gets 100 percent of what they want," says Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson.

The mayor's proposal aims at severely limiting the possibility of public disturbance on the plaza, but it does not give complete control over the street to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

And because of that, it seems to be drawing mixed reviews.

Simply stated, the mayor's plan gives the LDS Church 90 percent of the easement on the Main Street Plaza.

But he also proposed that the sidewalk farthest from Temple Square be a public easement, which includes group gathering areas where protests would be allowed.

But tonight, the LDS Church says, no deal.

Optimists might see the mayor's annoucment as an opening to resolve the bruising fight over Main Street.

But the reality is, tonight there's no compromise.

Anderson began his much-awaited proposal by praising the "spirit of generosity" of the LDS Church, and offering an olive branch.

"These have been an incredibly difficult six weeks, with much misunderstanding and far too much divisiveness. For any role I have played in that, I apologize," Anderson says.

He says the original deal between the city and the LDS Church never specifically defined what the "easement" is.

So he proposes a walkway about the size of a normal sidewalk along the entire east side of the plaza.

"With the definition of the easement, the Church of Jesus Christ will have free and clear title to the vast majority of the plaza, approximately 90 percent, and will have the ability to regulate conduct just as any private property owner would on its own property," Anderson says.

On the north and south ends of the easement, the mayor proposes small protest zones where groups can gather. People could still pass out literature in the rest of the plaza, as long as they abide by noise and disturbance regulations.

Anderson believes his plan gives both the city and the LDS Church almost all of what they bargained for back in 1999, when the deal was made.

After hearing the mayor's proposal, the two primary antagonists had decidely different reactions.

"I'm confident that through the public process, it's possible to end up with regulations that everyone can agree on. I'm afraid we're headed back to court," says Stephen Clark, attorney for the ACLU.

"The city has a legitimate expectation that the public has a right to enter the property and pass over it and make use of it. We don't think the parties intended for there to be protesters, hecklers. The deal would not have gone forward if that had not been the case," says Alan Sullivan, attorney for the LDS Church.

On Tuesday, a meeting will be held by the Salt Lake City Council, designed to explore the original intent of the parties in the deal.

Then there will be a chance for the public to weigh in. That date is Tuesday, December 17.

There has also been a lot of discussion behind the scenes about the plaza between the mayor and LDS Church leaders. KSL interviewed the man who has been the go-between for both parties, Utah businessman Jon Huntsman Sr.

Anderson and Huntsman have been friends for a long time, and have worked on various projects together.

For the past week or so, Huntsman has been going back and forth between the mayor's office and the LDS Church Office Building, playing the role of "mediator."

This afternoon, he attended a meeting with the LDS Church First Presidency, then met with Mayor Anderson before the mayor held his news conference.

Huntsman declined an on-camera interview, but he told the Deseret News that he's been working almost around the clock trying to come up with a resolution.

He is optimistic, telling newspaper reporters, "We're going to work this thing through and it's going to work out fine for everybody."

Huntsman did tell us that both sides had made some concessions, but for now, there is still no conclusion to the dilemma. No word either on whether Mr. Huntsman has more meetings planned.