David Rodeback's Blog

Local Politics and Culture, National Politics,
Life Among the Mormons, and Other Stuff

Ten Most Recent Comments

August 28, 2008

American Fork Miscellany

We'll get back to national politics shortly. I listened to part of Barack Obama's convention speech last evening, but will reserve comment until I've heard or read the whole thing. And I have some early thoughts about Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate. (Very interesting!) We'll get to all that. But first, some local housekeeping.

American Fork Property Tax Increase: Aftermath

I'm not crazy about the 17.14 percent tax increase the City Council approved, but I will say this: You and I seem to have had some influence. If reports from individual members of the City Council are accurate, hundreds of American Forkers told at least one member of the Council their views on raising taxes, either in person, by phone, by mail or e-mail, or at the hearing itself. Some long-time observers told me they don't remember a proposed tax increase getting anywhere near the amount of discussion and debate this one did. Good work, people.

Media reports emphasized different numbers than I did. The Daily Herald had the increase as "less than expected" -- it was actually more, if your expectations were current -- and mentioned only the 9.6 percent increase over last year's rate, not the 17.14 percent over this year's certified tax rate. The Deseret News had it taking five motions, not seven -- two of them were made twice -- and technically was incorrect about the size of the increase, since it specified a certified tax rate increase of "slightly more than 9.6 percent."

In case you're still interested enough to want to sort out the numbers, here's my earlier report on what the City Council actually did.

In Other American Fork News . . .

There was a Utah County groundbreaking for FrontRunner, the commuter rail line, on the same day as the American Fork property tax increase.

And the relatively recent interlibrary agreement, which gives public library patrons in Eagle Mountain, Lehi, American Fork, and Pleasant Grove access to all four libraries' collections, is getting some press lately. Here's the Daily Herald's article. Here's MFCC's blog post from several weeks ago.

900 West Anticlimax

Tuesday evening the American Fork City Council approved a zoning change to allow development of the Carson properties on 900 West, just north of Del Taco. Councilman Rick Storrs was absent for medical reasons. Councilors Shirl LeBaron and MFCC voted yea; Councilors Dale Gunther and Sherry Kramer voted nay. When there is a tie vote, the mayor gets to cast a tie-breaking vote; Mayor Heber Thompson voted yea.

Almost no one showed up to comment on this item, in stark contrast to the crowds who appeared earlier this year and back in 2006, mostly to oppose development.

The previous version of the proposal was to zone the entire property commercial. The version approved Tuesday evening zones roughly the southern half of the property commercial, but the northern half is zoned for professional offices. This is intended to provide a buffer between the commercial area and the adjacent residential and agricultural zones -- both a physical and a political buffer, actually, the latter because it will be more difficult to zone the next piece of land commercial. This change and the fact that the plan includes the developer doing about $600,000 worth of upgrades on the streets there, which the City cannot currently afford to do itself, was enough to tip the balance and win approval.

Earlier this year, I suggested that the neighbors accept the previous plan and call it a win. This win is a little more solid than that would have been, and probably is enough to satisfy all but the people who don't think the property should be developed at all. Case closed -- assuming things go as planned, that is.

Insert Final Item Here

. . . Or not. I had planned one other American Fork item for this post, a fun one, but it's not quite ready, so it will come later, complete with hilarious, potentially disturbing photos.

August 27, 2008

One Down, One to Go

What the Delegates Did

I was outside building a literal fence this evening while the Democrats in Denver mended figurative fences. When darkness fell, I lay down my tools and hurried to the Internet to see how things had gone at the Democratic National Convention.

I heaved a sigh of relief at the news that Barack Obama is now the party's official nominee for president of the mean, bitter country of which Mrs. Obama has only lately become proud. It's not that I think Senator Obama will make a great president; I think he'll make a spectacularly bad one. My relief at the news of his official nomination is rooted in the fact that now Senator Hillary Clinton officially is not the party's nominee. The opponent is now just a Democrat, not a Clinton -- a leftist, to be sure, but not a leftist with her own three-ring circus.

Senator Clinton managed to make the day very much about her, but she did release her delegates this afternoon. And when the roll call vote was in progress, she moved to suspend the rules and declare Senator Obama the party's candidate by acclamation, which the delegates did.

Whew.

For more details of the voting, see the FoxNews article.

For insightful and not-bitterly-partisan notes about the convention so far, including tonight's speeches by former president Bill Clinton and veep wannabe Senator Joe Biden, read Peggy Noonan.

Across the Aisle

Rumor has it Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican (?) nominee, will announce his running mate on Friday. Here are two interesting names that don't seem to be on the short list.

Former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania is a genuine, intelligent, articulate conservative who would help draw in the conservatives who have learned well over the years to regard Senator McCain with suspicious and dislike. Santorum would be more palatable to the party's religious bigot demographic (Huckabee voters) than Mitt Romney, himself an interesting possibility who is on the short list. Santorum has better conservative credentials than Romney. On the other hand, he does not have Romney's executive experience, and we already have too many Senators on the presidential ballot.

Secretary of State Dr. Condoleezza Rice may not want the job, but she has about as much real foreign policy experience as all 100 Senators think they have -- combined -- and is smart enough to tie Senator Biden in knots in a vice presidential debate. She's also a Russia expert, which is looking like a good thing to have around these days, and she's a very talented pianist, which is always a good thing to have around.

What was that?

No, I don't advise the McCain campaign. You're kidding, right?

August 25, 2008

Tyranny on Parade

If you stop by the blog here often enough, you might have noticed the absence of new posts for nearly two weeks. It wasn't a self-imposed cooling-off period after American Fork's property tax increase, and I wasn't that captivated by the Olympics, though I did enjoy the events I watched. Nor was I drafted by the US government to employ my fading Russian language skills to help get the Russians out of Georgia. It was much more prosaic than any of that. I came down with an unhappy mix of the flu and too much work to do, and I'm just now coming up for air (cough, cough).

In those two weeks, several noteworthy things have occurred, and, yes, I intend to note them, some now and some later. We'll start with tyranny, Communist and otherwise.

Tyranny on Parade, Part 1

Chinese Communism tarted itself up rather well for the Olympiad, I suppose, but anyone who has been paying attention has probably noticed that ancient nation's slip on rather frequent display. They shut down much of their industry in and around Beijing several weeks before the Games, in an effort to clean up the air. They told the locals not to wear colors that clash too much on the streets, and there were reports of many Chinese being turned away from events because they didn't look -- what? -- cosmopolitan enough? Telegenic enough?

Unfettered Internet access promised to international journalists was, well, fettered. Designated protest zones were both quite distant from events and mysteriously (?) empty of protestors -- not that I really care about political protests at the Olympics -- and some would-be protestors apparently were jailed for applying repeatedly for protest permits. Venues supposedly sold-out turned out to be mostly empty. The child with the beautiful singing voice sang from backstage at the opening ceremony, while a cuter child with better teeth lip-synched for the cameras. I even heard that some computer-generated fireworks images were inserted into the television feed that evening, presumably because someone thought the real fireworks might not be impressive enough to the outside world.

Here are some things I don't know: Have Chinese leaders been more concerned to display their nation's perfection and unassailable superiority to the rest of the world, to themselves, or to their people? Have they worried more about displaying that supposed superiority or persuading the rest of the world that they belong in the company of the modern world's greatest nations? Have they ever heard the adage, "No one who insists, 'I'm as good as you,' actually believes it"? And finally, how does one say Potemkin Village in Chinese? The national insecurities here are massive.

For what it's worth, I'm not nearly the only person who thought of Potemkin Villages. I just Googled china olympics potemkin and got about 14,000 results. Here are three of the better articles I found: one from Time, one from the Columbia Journalism Review, and one from -- forgive me -- The Huffington Post.

Tyranny on Parade, Part 1.1

The Paralympics are coming up in Beijing in September, as is always the case after a regular Olympiad. It would seem to be in character for the Chinese to do one of these two things: Have able-bodied Chinese athletes pretend to be handicapped, so that China can win most or all of the medals. Even China's handicapped people are superior! Or graciously host the whole event for the world, but have no Chinese athletes there, because perfect China doesn't have any handicapped people!

Tyranny on Parade, Part 2

When the news broke that Russia had invaded Georgia on the day before the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics, I found myself wondering how many people thought the Russians were marching on Atlanta. I assume my readers, at least, have sufficient geopolitical awareness to realize immediately that the place Russia invaded was the former Soviet Republic of Georgia (called Gruzia in Russian), not the hometown of Coca-Cola.

Russia wants its empire back. Whatever else this little escapade may be, it is a test. Who cares about a little place most folks can't find on a map enough to do something about it? And does anyone remember that Hitler used a similar justification for invading one of his neighbors, the need to defend or unite with an ethnic minority in that country? And does NATO have enough teeth or spine or whatever to welcome Ukraine as a member -- and soon? Ukraine is the biggest, juiciest Russian target, if empire-building is the agenda.

Seven years ago, President Bush met with Vladimir Putin. Bush famously said:

I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country.

This led to the best American line so far about the Georgia invasion: Senator and presidential candidate John McCain said he looked Putin in the eye and saw "a K, a G, and a B." It was a good line, whether or not it was original.

Don't expect anything serious from the United Nations in this matter. Russia has a veto on the Security Council, and much of Europe is quite conscious that a large percentage of its energy comes from Russia.

I wonder if the American Left will love Russia less in the coming empire-building years than it loved the Soviet Union during its 70-year tenure. After all, this time the Russian empire comes without the restraint and the (to some) attractive veneer of Marxist-Leninist ideology.

Moscow uber alles, y'know?

August 12, 2008

American Fork City Council Approves 17.14 Percent Property Tax Rate Increase

The American Fork City Council labored mightily tonight for about an hour and a half, and finally brought forth a 17.14 percent property tax rate increase. Those who voted for it will tout it as a 9.62 percent increase. I'll tell you briefly what the difference is, and then I'll tell you how it came about and who voted for and against which motions. Unlike most City Council proceedings, it was very interesting to watch.

If the Council passed no rate increase at all, the tax rate would not be the same as it was last year. It would be the "certified tax rate" calculated by the County, according to Utah law, which tends to be lower than the previous year's rate. (Here is a detailed explanation of certified tax rates.) So the most proper baseline for measuring increases is this year's certified tax rate. Still, it does make some sense to look at the previous year's rate too. This is how the City could say going into tonight's meeting that it was looking at an 8.27 percent increase over last year's rate, while I could insist that that would really be a 15.7 percent increase, based upon this year's certified tax rate. Both numbers are correct as stated.

As we work through this, bear these numbers in mind:

0.002071      this year's certified tax rate
0.002213      last year's certified tax rate
0.002396      working proposal after last week's Council work session

(Note that your property tax is calculated by multiplying the rate times 55 percent of assessed value for a primary residence, or 100 percent of assessed value for other properties.)

First Motion: 0.002213

Here's how things played out tonight. As soon as discussion on the item was opened, Councilmember Heidi Rodeback (MFCC) moved to adopt last year's rate, 0.002213, as this year's rate, a 6.8 percent increase over this year's certified rate.

The two items intended for funding after last week's work session were the widening of the Beehive Park road and $250,000 for street repairs. To accommodate the lower rate, MFCC proposed moving the Beehive Park road project to a bond issue to be put on the November ballot, and decreasing the street fund to about $200,000.

There was lengthy discussion, including MFCC insisting that three of her colleagues should come down the hill and talk to her neighbors about strained household budgets. Councilman Dale Gunther spoke of false economies, where one saves a little now but pays a lot more later. In the end, this first motion died because none of the others would second it.

The rate was too high for Councilman Storrs and too low for the others, we soon learned. Later in the evening, MFCC would repeat that this rate was the highest she would go, that she would vote against any higher number.

Second Motion: 0.002330

Councilman Gunther used some calculations based on an glaringly unscientific sample of about half a dozen residents' taxes to determine that he thought 0.002330 would be fair, because it would have those residents (whose assessed property values decreased) paying about the same number of dollars this year as last year. This would be a 12.5 percent increase over this year's certified rate, and a 5.29 percent increase over last year's rate. He also specified moving the Beehive Park project to a bond, as previously discussed, and using the $364,573 this increase would net for street repairs.

Councilman Shirl LeBaron seconded the motion, and I expected it to pass three-to-two, but in the end only he and Councilman Gunther voted for it. MFCC, Councilman Rick Storrs, and Councilmember Sherry Kramer voted nay.

Third Motion: 0.002497

Councilmember Kramer proposed the highest rate of the evening, 0.002497, enough to raise the roads numbers from the previous motions to $600,000. This would be a 20.57 percent increase over this year's certified rate. Her motion failed for lack of a second.

Fourth Motion: 0.002071

Councilman Storrs, who maintained from the beginning of discussions several weeks ago that he opposed any tax increase, moved to approve the certified rate for this year, 0.002071. MFCC seconded, and the motion failed three-to-two, with only Councilors Storrs and Rodeback voting yea.

Fifth Motion: Same as the First

MFCC repeated her original motion, but there were still no takers.

Sixth Motion: Same as the Second

Councilman Gunther repeated his original motion; this time there wasn't even a second.

Seventh Motion: 0.002426

Councilman LeBaron moved to approve 0.002426, a 17.14 percent increase, which would allow $500,000 for the roads. Councilors LeBaron, Kramer, and Gunther voted yea; Councilors Storrs and Rodeback voted nay, and the motion passed. It is a larger increase than the Council had contemplated last week, when, admittedly, Councilors LeBaron and Kramer were absent.

One might wonder if Councilors LeBaron and Kramer might have been swayed a bit, had they been present at the hearing last Tuesday. We'll never know. At least Councilman LeBaron reported having read the minutes carefully and talked to some of the people who spoke at the hearing.

So it's a 17.14 percent increase. Or it's 9.62 percent. Take your pick. The higher number is real; the lower one is politics, which isn't entirely unreal.

Aftermath

The same three voted for the annual budget, adjusted to fit the newly approved tax rate, and the same two voted against it. This is unsurprising; the two issues go together, though they were two separate agenda items.

Then there was some discussion and final approval of five bond issues to be proposed on the November ballot, of which more later. The total amount will be just shy of $20 million, if all the bonds pass, which seems unlikely. It -- whatever the voters approve, if anything -- will all come from property tax rate increases beyond what the Council approved tonight.

I'd say something trite like, Hold onto your wallet . . . but I wonder how much point there is to holding onto an increasingly empty container.

Instead, I will say this. The increase that emerged tonight was a little higher than I expected and considerably higher than I supported, but I was pleased by something about the process. I think the extensive discussion and the formal rejection of three lower numbers tonight -- and the arguments behind them -- serve a useful purpose. It should now be difficult for anyone on the Council who voted for the 17.14 percent increase to pat himself or herself on the back for keeping the tax increase so small. If the process had been easier tonight, if it had not including rejecting three lower numbers, there might have been a greater temptation to unwarranted self-congratulation.

David G. Fletcher comments (8/19/08):

Thanks for your excellent and insightful post on the tax increase in American Fork. I appreciate yours and Heidi's efforts to share information about what is happening as I have little time lately to learn through other venues.

I also appreciate your efforts to keep taxes under control. Although I am a public employee, I have always tried to keep government. expenses at a minimum and keep government operating as efficiently as possible.

It seems to me that is not happening in American Fork. I am concerned that the whole secondary irrigation thing was a bad mistake. At least, it seems that way to me. It also seems that we could use a little better planning in the city.

At least, I hope efforts like yours will help keep people honest.

Thanks,

David G. Fletcher
CTO, State of Utah (resident of American Fork)
http://davidfletcher.blogspot.com
http://www.twitter.com/dfletcher

August 11, 2008

City Council Vote on Tax Increase Tomorrow

Tomorrow evening (Tuesday, August 12) in the regular American Fork City Council meeting, the much-ballyhooed property tax rate increase will come up for vote. With the proposed increase down to 8.3 or 15.7 percent, depending on how you measure it, I expect the increase will pass by a three-to-two margin, with City Councilors Sherry Kramer and Shirl LeBaron (both of whom are back in town) joining Councilman Dale Gunther to provide the winning margin, and Councilors Rick Storrs and Heidi Rodeback (MFCC) voting against it. We'll see.

The meeting begins at 7:30 p.m., but the property tax increase vote will come somewhat later, perhaps more than half an hour later. There will also be a vote on the proposed annual budget for the City. A hearing on the budget (not the tax increase) will be held before the regular meeting, at 7:00 p.m. Here is the evening's agenda.

It's still not too late to send an e-mail or make a phone call to Mayor Thompson and the City Council (here is contact information). If you want to comment at the meeting, don't try it during the public comment period, because items which are on the evening's agenda are out of order then. They are discussed when the item comes up on the agenda.

Meanwhile, The Deseret News reported on last week's hearing.

I don't think things will get this tricky, but . . . what if they vote for the same tax rate as last year? The way state law measures such things, this would be about a 6.9 percent increase, but the City could still say it left the rate the same as last year. They could have about one-third of the proposed increase with very little of the (proposed) political fallout.