OCR Text |
Show The Newspaper Thursday, November 5, 1981 Page A3 ILeittteirs it tlfee EMitton Give Bud a chance Dear Editor, Last Thursday evening, the City Council input session was filled with men and women representing Park City golfers. Several people spoke to the issue of hiring the new pro for the Park City Municipal Golf Course. For one hour, comments were made expressing ex-pressing the desire for Bud Tonnesen to be promoted from Assistant Pro to the Park City Golf Course Pro. There is no question that the City Council got the message that we all like Bud Tonnesen, Ton-nesen, but we don't like Bud because we grew up as neighbors and it's not because his mother is a friend of our mothers. We like Bud because every interaction we have had with him in his professional capacity has been nothing but positive. He has worked endlessly with the women's eolf league to make it a strong, organizeu association, tie has worked with the president, vice president, the rules chairman and handicap officer to ensure we all learned lear-ned to play the game properly. And anyone who has played golf knows the importance of lessons. Bud is a superb instructor who tailors each lesson to the needs and ability of each individual. in-dividual. In addition to his friendly, helpful manner, Bud is good at his job. Let's give him a chance! Sincerely Cindy Huseth Time to correct ad Editor. The following is a letter to Edgar and Company: Gentlemen: I would appreciate your cooperation in correcting a factual error which is contained in the advertisement you have been running in the Salt Lake and Park City newspapers for Quail Meadows. The ad reads "Quail Meadows in Park City" and as you know, it is, in fact, located in the Silver Springs area which is near, but not in, Park City. Ordinarily that would not be of concern con-cern to Park City Municipal Corporation, Cor-poration, but because your project is sold on a timeshare basis, it has caused the city some unnecessary complications because all timesharing in Park City has been stopped under a 6-month moratorium on the construction construc-tion or sale of new timeshare projects. I have received repeated calls con- ceming why this one project is allowed to timeshare in Park City and have to explain that the project is not located in Park City. I ask only your cooperation in changing your ad to read near Park City. Arlene Loble City Manager Mary writes Editor: The following is a letter to Jan Wilking. Your letter last week tried to rebut the accusations I make as to why incumbent city candidates should not be elected. You warned voters to think again before casting ballots based on my "false" accusations. Your facts were as poor as your memory. You said that my worst accusation of all was that Jack Green appeared at the Jan. 1974 public hearing prerequisite prerequi-site to adopting the present revised Master Plan to protest that his property on Park Avenue be changed from its existing zone to Commercial. You then state, "As chairman of the Master Plan Committee which was conducting the public hearing, I can state that this is not true." Jan, you're all wet. The original Master Plan was revised during 1973 by Architect Planners Alliance (APA) under a $20,000 federal grant. The revision was completed in Dec. 1973. Publication of the 15 days advance notice of the public hearing prerequisite prerequi-site to the council adopting the Revised Master Plan was given before you attended your first council meeting after being sworn into office Jan. 7, 1974. The city council held the public hearing on Jan. 31, 1974. That is where Mr. Green stood up to propose that his zoning on the proposed map be changed to Commercial. After the public hearing, the city council adopted the Revised Master Plan on Feb. 7, 1974. After the council adopted the Revised Master Plan, an informal meeting was held Feb. 11, 1974 to discuss rezoning of Park City to effectuate the new Plan. The next council meeting was held Feb. 21, 1974. A decision was made to revise the zoning and the Zoning Ordinance of 1968 to implement the Revised Master Plan. The Planning Commission and city council, designated as the Master Plan Committee, was delegated this responsibility, and Mayor Price appointed ap-pointed you chairman of this new committee. Explain to me how you performed your feat of magic of conducting the public hearing of Jan. 1974 as chairman of the Master Plan Committee Commit-tee which was formed a month later. You continue by saying that during the rezoning process I was doing what I accused Jack of. In support of your accusation, you made this statement: "The Master Plan Committee recom mended that the entrance area to Deer Valley, where Mary has substantial land holdings, be zoned HR-1. Throughout Through-out the process to rewrite the zoning ordinance, she argued that the land there should be zoned R-M." In answer to this misstatement, I say to you, Jan, that your memory is again either conveniently bad or else you are deliberately lying. The Master Plan Committee never recommended that the entrance area of Deer Valley be zoned HR-1. You and Gene Carr of APA prepared your conception of how Park City should be rezoned and presented it to the Committee on a large sheet of white paper with the zones outlined in blue felt marker pen lines. My area, which was already zoned R-M, was indeed labelled and proposed to be rezoned HR-1. As an attorney knowledgeable of the law, I pointed out that the law did not permit any governing body to impose an historic district unless there was something there of historic significance to be preserved. Since there was nothing there except 17-18 squatters' shacks like mine and the metal gas company shed enclosed by a chain link fence, the Master Plan Committee scrubbed your personal desire for an illegal, indefensible historic district in the spring of 1973 at the inception of the rewriting process. Simultaneously, I observed that it was logical to retain the existing R-M zoning in the area (which zone permits tourist lodging, and multi-dwellings) because it was walking distance to Main Street and its tourist amenities and buses to the ski resort. The Master Plan Committee agreed that the existing R-M zoning was proper and should be continued as such in the rezoning process. This decision was made at the inception of the rewriting process in the spring of 1973, and throughout the entire rewriting process pro-cess under your chairmanship which culminated on Oct. 16, 1976, no one ever proposed that it be changed from its R-M status. I attended my last Master Plan Committee meeting in Sept. 1975, and my tenure as councilman ended Dec. 31, 1975. In fact, your own city council recodified this area as R-M in the revised Zoning Ordinance you adopted Oct. 16, 1976, 10'2 months after I left office. So much for your misrepresented statement that throughout the rewriting rewrit-ing process of over 3Vz years I argued to have the area zoned R-M to "greatly increase the value of her property." i As for yourjpjnding jny, comments ,on, my " adioinW ''Miserable plex"" jonic because the 8-plex was only allowed because I successfully increased in-creased the density of the area. On the contrary, if you are at all interested in the truth, you could profit by researching the city council minutes of 1972. You will find that shortly after I took office in Jan. 1972, 1 spearheaded a movement to downzone many areas, including my own, from R-M to R-l to limit densities which were then beginning to degenerate our town. Regrettably, three of my colleagues, with the usual lack of foresight common to our city councils, outvoted me, and those R-M districts, including mine, zoned into place in 1971 have remained in place ever since, albeit when the incumbent city council was to rework the zoning ordinance to lessen densities, the only area in the whole city they reduced densities in was my small R-M zone. They actually tried to attempt greater restrictions on us than those in R-l ! But I will have to admit they are impartial they are as liberal with their anti-favoritism as they are with their favoritism! Back to the 8-plex. I didn't find it "miserable" because it was an 8-plex. Any 8-plex was legal here since 1971. It was "miserable" because it violated the provisions of the Land Management Manage-ment Code and the building plan approved by the Planning Commission. Commis-sion. It was particularly offensive in its excessive violation of the height code. After Bill Ligety, Councilman Wells and Planning Comm. Chairman Burnis Watts inspected it and reported it to the city council as being in violation, the former city council put a Stop Work order on it in Oct. 1979 over the protests of Mayor Green and his puppet Building Inspector, who fought us and our neighbors all summer and stoutly defended it as being totally legal. As for your statement that in all the time you served on the council with Green you do not believe that he once cast a vo'e from which he "reaped substantial benefits", where have you been? You know that you and I and the rest of the Master Plan Committee, except Jack, for almost three years of the rewriting process that elapsed until I left office Dec. 31, 1975, steadfastly refused Jack's plea to zone his property on Park Ave. Commercial instead of R-l. Jack took office as councilman Jan. 1976. Yet you and he were on the council who voted on Oct. 16, 1976 to zone his property R-M instead of R-l. (I guess giving him Commercial was too blatant.) You made much in your letter of my alleged efforts to zone my property R-M to "greatly increase its value" but you don't think his voting his own property R-M instead of R-l reaped him any substantial benefit. What kind of goobley-gook are you trying to peddle? I almost forgot your question as to how Bill Coleman's success relates to his position as Planning Commissioner. Commis-sioner. I cite one typical example. Coleman received the greatest portion (some $86,000) of the various realtors' commissions involved in the multi-million multi-million dollar sale of the Hanley property, part of which commission was paid on closing, balance if buyer completed sale and did not "walk away" if his plan did not reach fruition for which success Buyer sought annexation into city and rezoning. Thereafter, Planning Comm. minutes of Aug. 12, 1981 revealed presentation of Buyers's proposal to zone Hanley parcel RDM and Estate pending Annexation Petition pending for City Council hearing on Aug. 27. Coleman voted in favor of motion to grant proposed zoning. Sept. 23, 1981 mintues of Planning Comm. reveal Coleman voted "aye" on Motion to recommend that city grant pending Annexation petition. Nowhere do these minutes reflect that Coleman disclosed that he had any interest, financial or otherwise other-wise in the rezoning and annexation motions he voted on favorable for this project. You say my charge that Bob Wells made "no disclosure of any connection with Royal Street and its Deer Valley development is ridiculous since it was a well-known fact that Bob was working for Royal Street." It may have been well-known to you and your cohorts who drink, eat and literally sleep in the same bed with Wells, but it was not known to the public. I, for one, had no knowledge of it until Royal Street announced his discharge in the papers last spring. It was so little known that the Citizens' Council received an anonymous letter informing inform-ing us that Wells was a stockholder in Royal Street and why wasn't he required to make this fact public and refrain from voting on Deer Valley matters. It was so little known that two of the most important businessmen in Park City who were reliable and in the know told me that Wells was stockholder and asked how he could be forced to make this information public and be required to refrain from voting on Deer Valley projects where he had an obvious conflict of interest. When Bob first ran for public office four years ago, a public "Meet the Candidates" forum sponsored by Eleanor Bennett of the Atheneum Society, Wells deplored his public image of a developer. He loudly disclaimed any involvement as a developer. He insisted that his only possible involvement with any development develop-ment in Park City was to turn an ugjy j,; building (which he. forgot to mention "Svas' built in the first 'place by his employer Greater Park City Co.) into the beautiful Mt. Air Mall. Wells maintained throughout his recent campaign that he always disclosed his conflicts of interest and that State law permitted him to vote on issues after he made such disclosures. Apparently he was not all that assiduous in making disclosures of conflicts of interest during his past four years in office. In browsing through old official city minutes which encompassed encom-passed the first couple of years he was in office, I noticed the many times he had voted on Deer Valley matters, but nowhere in those minutes did I find any mention that he disclosed that he had interest in the company whose interests were being voted on. A long way down the line I found a very interesting item. At a council meeting (I regret I did not make a note of the date), when the minutes of the previous council meeting came up for approval, Mr. Wells asked that those previous minutes be amended to retroactively cancel a vote he had cast at that previous meeting because, he now wished to announce, he had an interest in the matter on which he voted. Next time you want to write letters about my "false" accusations, Jan, get your facts and the truth straightened out before you go mouthing off, as you always do the last issue before election. Mary Lehmer ... and Wilking responds Dear Mary, I'm sorry, but you're the one who is all wet in stating that I was appointed chairman of the Master Plan Committee Commit-tee after the public hearing. Please consult the official minutes of the City Council meeting of January 17, 1974 and you will see that I was appointed chairman of the committee at that time. In your letter you asked me to "get your facts and the truth straightened out." You should take your own advice. ad-vice. Jan Wilking A vote for Bud Dear Editor: I support Bud Tonnesen. He does a terrific job! An important factor is that he makes you feel welcome and this is what it's all about. Park City should have its own people involved in this outstanding position (Golf Pro) and Bud is one of your own people! A. Lorraine Anderson Hospitality Officer (1981) Park City Ladies Golf Association. Clinic kudos Editor, The Park City Community Clinic, Inc. wishes to thank The Newspaper for the recent publicity about the celebration of our one-year anniversary. anniver-sary. We have experienced many positive responses from the article that appeared. ap-peared. We hope to continue to serve the community, as well as the surrounding areas, in whatever capacity we are needed. Again, that you Newspaper and the community, for your continued support. sup-port. Sincerely, Pam M. Jacobson President, Board of Directors More from Mary Editor: The following is a letter to Helen Alvarez. In your ad last week seeking to establish "truth", since "my experience experi-ence with Mrs. Lehmer has taught me that she often tells half truths, the half that suits her purpose," let's get the "truth" out instead of your half truths. When I published in my ad that Mayor Ted Wilson's salary on Jan. 5, 1980 when he took office after Salt Lake City voted to have a full-time Mayor run the city instead of a City Manager was $34,600, you attempted to belie my figure by setting forth Mayor Wilson's as $39,000. You didn't bother to tell the truth about this disparity of numbers. The truth was what I personally told you on the phone when I called you Sunday to verify that Loble was hired at $30,000 yr., nine months after Wilson toook office $34,600. I personally told you on the phone that Mayor Wilson's salary was increased last month to $39,000. You couldn't see fit to make this explanation, could you? Or maybe you don't know that to tell half a truth is to conceal a lie. As for your saying I "simply neglected" to tell you that SLC has a full-time City Administrator (at $50,000 yr., no less) in addition to Mayor Wilson, I didn't "simply neglect" to tell you something I didn't know. When I called Mayor Wilson's office to verify his salary and the 1980 population of Salt Lake City, his secretary didn't bother to tell me he 'had a $50,000 "administrative assis-. tant." When he was elected as a ' full-time Mayor to run Salt Lake City, the voters of that citv and I have the right to rely that iie is Qomg juai uku. u he has managed to get a $50,000 vr. assistant to ease the monkey off his back, I am sure the voters of Salt Lake will be very interested in that fact when he comes up for re-election two years hence. Your ad states: "I do know that Mary has twice asked the citizens for the opportunity to run the city and has twice been rejected. Now, Helen, you do know the truth and you do know better than that. Why don't you tell the truth? The only time I personally sought public office in Park City was when I was elected in November 1971. When my seat as councilman and the Mayoi seat were up for election in 1975, 1 did not choose to run and did not file for office. When Leon Uriarte and Dave Novelle were the only ones who had filed for Mayor, a number of citizens who found neither choice acceptable implored me to run on a write-in ballot. I refused. They finally prevailed upon me to say I would serve if they got me elected on a write-in ticket. They contributed their money, time and effort and raised money for ads, bumper stickers, pencils, and a door-to-door distribution of a last minute flyer to refute the false accusations of an anonymous hate letter (later traced to Uriarte's campaign manager Ted Armengol) placed in all the postal boxes the Monday before Tuesday's election. Despite the difficulty of being elected on a write-in ballot, I received an impressive 36 percent of the votes cast in that election which was further fragmented by a second write-in candidate. In 1975 (sic) I was again approached by many people to run against Councilman Jack Green, who was then unopposed for Mayor. I told these people I was not interested in opposing Green, the darling of the realtor developer king-maker clique of Park City, as I and my family didn't need the villification and humiliation which I knew would be heaped upon me by the special interest groups who don't like my brand of government. (You surely remember the infamous 1974 Petition of Warren King and his personal Mayor, John Price, circulated to discredit me and run me off the council and out of town because of my persistence in exposing the ripoffs Greater Park City Co. was practicing on the town.) I did tell these people, however, that 1 was not adverse to serving as Councilman and trying my best again if they wanted that. They apparently" did. They circulated circula-ted the petition to obtain the required Lower Main Street building for lease 4200 sq. feet For appointment call 649-7220 number of signatures to place m on the ballot. They appointed a campaign manager, contributed money and raised money to pay for political ads and printing and mailings of campaign literature. I didn't much care one way or another. I think my total contribution contribu-tion to the campaign was about two hours' door-to-door campaigning. In the primaries I came in second in the entire field and Bob Wells came in third. That such might be the final result was anathema to the moneyed minions of the vested interest groups. The cocktail parties for Bob Wells in the uninitiated new part of town are legend. The well-orchestrated, well-planned well-planned campaign of Bob's wife (Gump & Avers saleswoman) and meir supporters was a marvel to watch. I compliment them on the job they did. The rest is history. In the finals Wells came in second and I came in third. He earned it, even though he did have to pretend he was not a developer. As for your last statement that failing to get myself elected, I am now trying to elect my puppets, you did not !"' " etnnn so low to ralumnv the three honoraoie, respectable candidates candi-dates I chose to endorse for office. I am a free agent and made my own choice based on my own objective evaluation of all the candidates in the primary. Not one of my endorsees sought my endorsement or even knew that I was planning to pay for publication of my personal views. Not one of them consulted me or sought my advice or promised my anything. You attempted to demean and degrade these men by referring to them as anyone's puppets. In the final analysis, I think you demeaned only yourself. Mary Lehmer Carnival thanks Dear Park City: The Park City P.T.A. would like to thank all members of our community who made contributions to the P.T.A, Halloween Carnival: Thank you business proprietors for your most generous contributions. Thank you parents and friends for your gift of manpower to run the carnival. Thank you staff of Carl Winters Middle School and Parley's Park Elementary School for all your help and extra time. Thank you to all who attended the carnival for your financial support and for making it an enjoyable evening. Sincerely yours, 1 Park City P.T.A. |