More from KSL.com. Reporting is done by Keith McCord.
***************************************
The mayor offers a plan to solve the battle over the Main Street Plaza, but the controversy seems far from finished.
Mayor Rocky Anderson says his plan is a "win-win" situation -- a four-part proposal that he says will address the needs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and still be constitutionally correct.
"This does not have to be a win-lose situation for anyone. And it certainly does not have to be a matter that festers, creating divisiveness along religious lines," Anderson says.
But was anything really new proposed here?
Yes and no. We've heard some of this before, but the mayor has refined some of his definitions.
LDS Church officials got a look at the plan yesterday, and word is, they still don't like it. The mayor, however, went public with the plan today to generate more discussion.
"These have been an incredibly difficult six weeks, with much misunderstanding, and far too much divisiveness," Anderson says. "For any role I have played in that, I apologize."
With that, Anderson outlined his plan to bring all sides together on the Main Street Plaza issue.
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.
"No one gets 100 percent of what they want, but that is a result of the fact that the essential terms of the initial deal are not constitutionally compatible," he says.
As we said earlier, the LDS Church has rejected the restrictions, saying the rules don't adequately protect its property rights.
Shortly after the mayor's announcement, News Specialist John Daley spoke with Alan Sullivan, the LDS Church's attorney.
"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," Sullivan says.
"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," he says.
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
- 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.
- 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?
- 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 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