OCR Text |
Show Page E4 Times-Independe- nt tEfye Thursday, October 28, 2004, tEtmgg-ttfrepgnfrg- nt FACSIMILE SAMPLE BALLOT guest editorials GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT FOR GRAND COUNTY, UTAH - NOVEMBER 2, 2004 Opposing views on Initiativel from former Utah officials Initiative 1 is investment in Utah 1 1 County Clerk - NOVEMBER 2, 2004 Format 0 Paackinl Pasdicani BaktNo. Ballot No. by Senator Jake Gam, retired Initiative 1 will raise $150 million in conservation bonds to protect our sources of drinking water, wildlife, farm and ranch-landparks and trails, open space and cultural and historic landmarks - all for only $14 per year for the average Utah family. It is a conservative measure based on the principal of stewardship: We owe it to future generations to prudently conserve the natural resources that add so much to our quality of life today. How can we afford to pass Initiative 1? The real question is If you wish to cast a STRAIGHT PARTY vote for ALL the candidates of ONE PARTY, punch the position indicated for the desired party. If you do vote STRAIGHT PARTY, you may also vote for candidates from another party in any race by punching the position which corresponds with the candidate's s, name. If you do not wish to vote STRAIGHT PARTY, you may cast votes for individual how can we afford not to? For instance, my former Senate colleagues tell of spending billions of dollars for water treatment plants in order to obtain potable water - but, by protecting our canyons, farmlands and watersheds today, we can do the same here in Utah for far less. It also makes sense, during these times of low interest rates, to obtain conservation financing at 3 percent to 4 percent at a time when land prices are escalating at 8 percent to 10 percent. In the long run, this timely investment in Utahs future will save taxpayers millions. Initiative 1 is not about wilderness or our public land, its about maintaining the quality of life where we five. It honors private property rights, prohibits condemnation, ensures all transactions will be completed on a willing seller basis and guarantees lands will remain on the tax rolls. Initiative 1 funds will be awarded to projects by the Quality Growth Commission, which has an outstanding record of managing conservation funds, on a competitive basis - and all finances will be subject to annual audits and legislative review. I also like Initiative ls emphasis on local control by involving local governments and civic leaders in the decision-makin- g process. While most funding will be available for land and water protection, enhancement programs to improve wildlife habitat, soils and groundwater management will also be eligible. And in rural communities with different quality-growt- h priorities, projects to build trails, recreational facilities and protect historic landmarks can be funded, too. Initiative 1 is about more than just open space. Initiative 1 has strong bipartisan support from The Salt Lake Tribune, the Deseret Morning News, KSL-Tboth gubernatorial candidates, numerous conservation groups and business and civic leaders statewide. It is a balanced proposal that puts people first - by allowing landowners and local communities to protect whats special to them, without government control, on an entirely voluntary basis. Finally, when I think of what other states are doing in this area, I have to ask: Are we as Utahns any less proud of our candidates. natural environment? In recent years conservation bonds have passed in Nevada ($200 million), Colorado ($170 million) and Arizona ($173 million) - while Utahs only state source for this purpose, the LeRay McAllister Fund, has been cut 74 percent by the Legislature to less than $800,000 today. Our neighboring states recognize how important these investments are to make. Its time we did, too. Theres an old saying, I didnt plan to fail, I just failed to plan. On Nov. 2 Im voting Yes on Initiative 1. 1 Format 0 GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT FOR GRAND COUNTY, UTAH hope you will, too. Constitutional Amendment Number 2 Shall the Utah Constitution be amended to authorize the state or a public institution of higher education to acquire an ownership interest in a private business in exchange for Punchcard Initiative 1: reasons to oppose Ballot No. by Congressman Jim Hansen, retired former chair of U.S. House Resources Committee Initiative One is like an insurance policy - the big print gives you the money and the many pages of fine print take it away. First, Id like to complement the Nature Conservancy for the many great things it has done for the state of Utah - but having said that, passing Initiative One is not in the best interest of the people of the state of Utah. re-wo- rk 105 NO 107 YES 110 NO 112 FCR 120 AGAT3T 122 rights to intellectual property developed by the state or public institution of higher education? Constitutional Amendment Number 3 Shall the Utah Constitution be amended to provide that: While most people believe in clean air, clean water, and open space, as I read the initiative, the initiative does little, if anything, to address any of these issues. The initiative would put some $58 million in the Quality Growth Fund. That money is then divided out to conservation projects by a Quality Growth Commission. The important thing the public needs to understand is that the majority of these projects will be purchases of conservation easements. A conservation easement is simply a development right - a payment to a farmer or rancher to not develop his land. The owner still retains ownership of the property with no guarantee that the public will have access to the land for any purpose, including hunting or hiking. In many cases, these farms and ranches are in rural areas where there is a small chance they would be developed. Wouldnt taxpayers rather see their money spent along the Wasatch Front or Wasatch Back on projects that they can use and enjoy? I know I would. Another problem is the initiative puts millions of dollars into the State Divisions of Natural Resources, Parks, Wildlife Resources, and the Department of Environmental Quality. What the administrators in these departments have to realize is that the state legislature will likely simply deduct this amount from their appropriated budgets - we used to play that game all the time when I was Speaker of the Utah House. These Departments may then find that all their money is earmarked for conservation purposes and they have none left for important op- erational issues. One part of this Open Space Initiative that has me head is the really scratching my part that allocates $30 million to local building projects. What do convention centers, recreation centers, and aquariums have to do with protecting clean water and open space? In addition, the State of Utah then becomes responsible for the taxes on these structures. Is that what we want? Shouldnt counties and municipalities be responsible for their own building needs? If this initiative passes, the legislature will have no choice this but to poorly drafted document. While the goals of preserving clean water and open space are admirable, this measure doesnt achieve those ends. And what about the states other financial needs, including transportation, education, and public safety? With the states bonding capacity stretched to its limit by this initiative, how will the legislature find funds for these other important items? Please vote NO on Initiative One. While its stated goals are laudatory, Im sure that once everyone reads the fine print, they will realize that this measure creates a financial boondoggle that we simply cannot afford. YES (1 ) marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman; and (2) no other domestic union may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equal legal effect? Citizens State Initiative Number 1 Shall a law be enacted to: (1) authorize the state to borrow up to $150 million by issuing bonds to be repaid within 1 3 years from a statewide sales tax increase of 1 20th of one cent and, only if necessary, from general state sales tax revenues; and (2) use bond proceeds for projects that, among other things: (a) preserve or enhance lakes, rivers, and streams, wildlife habitat, farms and ranches, trails, historical sites, parks, open space, and water and air quality; facilitate growth management; and build park, wildlife, or trail facilities; and (b) build local community facilities and improve natural history and cultural museums? GRAND COUNTY PROPOSITION Shall Section 2.04.030 in the form of Grand County Government be amended to reduce the members of the council from seven to five, all othei; provisions to remain the same: Constitutional Amendment Number 1 Shall the Utah Constitution be amended to: (1) explicitly authorize the Utah House of Representatives to convene for the purpose of impeachment if two-thirof the in representatives are favor of convening; ds (2) require the Utah Senate to convene for a trial of impeachment if the House of Representatives has voted to impeach; (3) allow the same amount of legislative compensation per day during an impeachment session as is allowed during an annual general session; and (4) delete an outdated reference to justices of the peace in an impeachment provision? 1 For the reduction of Council members to five 1 27 Against the reduction of Council members to five 128 GRAND COUNTY PROPOSITION yg 2 Shall Section 2.04.040 in the form of Grand County Government be amended to provide that all Council Members all be elected at large with no residence requirement as to districts? All other provisions of this section to remain unchanged except where inconsistent with the amendment. JQ1 jgg A For the All At Large Candidates 132 Against the All At Large Candidates 133 |