Just How Many Consultants are on the Mountain Accord?
In response to our article on the Mountain Accord Blueprint, a reader sent an email with the subject: Full Employment Act for Consultants. I thought the person was joking but then looked at an attachment that was included. I’m not laughing any more.
Here appear to be the outside consultants, as listed in various system groups, on the Mountain Accord project. It seems to be a who’s who of local consulting expertise.
Laynee Jones – Program Manager
Jeff Heilman – Parametrix
Krissy Nielsen – Technical Support
Loretta Markham – System Group Coordinator
Jim Carter – Technical Support
Nadine Fogarty – Technical Support
Buck Swaney – Technical Support
Andrea Clayton – Technical Lead
Stacey Aren – Technical Support — Water
Reid Persing – Technical Support — Ecosystems
Adrien Elseroad – Technical Support — Ecosystems
Elisa Albury – Technical Support — Land
Dave Shannon – Technical Support — Air Quality
Judy Dorsey – Technical Support — Climate Change
John Nepstad – Technical Lead
Jason Phillips – Technical Support
Kevin Rauhe – Technical Support
Sarah Nelson – Technical Support
Mike Grass – Fundraising
I realize that most projects require a little outside help, but wow! I also realize that most of these people aren’t the $20 per hour sort of people — maybe add a zero to that.
While I initially scoffed a bit at the email subject, I think the person is dead on with their “full employment analysis.” As they say, it’s a good gig if you can get it. As a former consultant, back in the hey-day of the profession, this would have been a dream job. If you are a partner with one of the firms involved, it’s just like gravy dripping from the bird. If I were them, I would want to drag this on as long as possible. There’s nothing better than a government contract, accountable to no one, that has no defined conclusion. Cha Ching.
It’s things like this that remind me that I’m in the wrong profession.
Here is the source material , in case you are interested.
h/t to the reader who sent this through. I couldn’t produce the Park Rag without help from you great community members. Thanks for the help.
in Development
Park City Day School Wants to Expand in Pinebrook
On Tuesday, April 28th the Snyderville Basin Planning Commission will hold a public hearing regarding expanding Park City Day School, in Pinebrook. The School wants to add a 5,500 square foot addition, located on the east side of the building, with six class rooms, a restroom and associated circulation.
My concern would stems from additional traffic on the frontage road by Fresh Market. Six classrooms with 15 kids likely mean about 80-100 more cars on the road. Perhaps the school has thought of a way to mitigate the issue.
Likewise, I wonder how this fits into the proposed General Plan Phase 2 where no new entitlements will be allowed (if that piece is approved by the County Council). Perhaps this is a little bit different since it is a conditional use permit application that may have already been contemplated.
If you have concerns, you may want to attend the Planning Committee Meeting and voice those:
Tuesday April 28, 2015 Beginning at 6:00 p.m.
Sheldon Richins Building (Summit County Library)
1885 W Ute Blvd.
Park City, Utah 84098
in Weather
NOAA Forecast Predicts Hot and Wet Summer
The NOAA makes long term forecasts for temperature and precipitation. While, by definition, forecasts aren’t perfect it does give some indication of what the weather service believes will happen.
In Utah’s case it appears June, July, and August are predicted to be above the mean temperature and have above the mean amount of the precipitation. If their forecast holds true, then hopefully the increased fire danger will be offset by increased precipitation.
in Dogs
The Park City Area has 66% LESS Dog Bites Than Average America
Over the past few years, the Park City and Summit County governments have been trying to figure out what to do about off-leash dogs. People see many dogs off-leash on our trails and then hear about dog bites around town and reason that off leash dogs are the cause of the problem.
I reached out to Summit County Animal Control to understand how many dog bites there were in 2014. They promptly responded that Summit County had 129 dog bites last year. I was taken aback because I would never have guessed that there were that many bites in our county. Yet sometimes numbers are misleading. I decided to research dog bites nationwide. According to a CDC study, there are approximately 4.5 million dog bites per year. That means about 1.5% percent of the US population is bitten each year.
Yet in Summit County that number is about 0.4% of the population. So, we are at about 1/3 of the national average . If this were burglaries or murder we would be celebrating our achievements. Yet with dogs, the narrative of Summit County being overrun by wild dogs seems to have overtaken the truth.
I don’t mean to make light of dog bites. I know even one dog bite is too many. The fear that victims have experienced must be extreme and I hope it never happens to me. That said, we are doing far better than average.
Yet, we as a community have seemed to correlate increased off-leash dogs with dog bites. If anything, if there are more off-leash dogs around Park City than average, then the correlation seems to demonstrate that more off-leash dogs leads to less dog bites.
So, I’m not sure there is actually an issue, relative to the populace as a whole. After getting the numbers, I am actually convinced that we are doing better than most. If our off-leash dog population decreased to the national average, would it decrease dog bites or would we revert to the mean (3 times as many dog bites)?
What I do know is that loose correlations based on what we think we see are often wrong. Perhaps initiatives like the Yellow Dog Project would be more successful at stopping dog bites than more leashes. Perhaps alternate days on certain trails (i.e. dogs both on and off-leash on even days and bikes and humans on odd days) would lower our dog bites. Perhaps exorbitant fines and restitution would make owners think twice about their aggressive dogs.
We don’t know.
What we do know is that we don’t, compared to others, have a problem. Could we reduce dog bites through government initiatives? Maybe. Is the answer proven to be cracking down on off-leash animals? Not by a long shot. Will cracking down make the problem worse? We’ll see.
We’ve found the Blueprint for Mountain Accord
Did you think the Mountain Accord came from nowhere — that it was a product of immaculate conception. Naively, I guess I did. I envisioned a group of people sitting around a table throwing out ideas. Arguing. Agreeing. Compromising. Then finally devising a solution to our watershed issues in the Wasatch.
However, recently I was searching for some stats on the number of people who use Little Cottonwood Canyon. Imagine my surprise when I came upon a document entitled MTS Report Final. It’s a document from 2012, paid for by Salt Lake County, and prepared by Fehr & Peers and Lochner. What does the document describe? Everything I’ve read about transportation related to Mountain Accord. Does it have trains? Yes. Does it have a tunnel from Brighton to PCMR? Yes. Does it even describe where that tunnel starts and stops. You bet it does.
It is so complete that you wonder why they even did the Mountain Accord. Couldn’t they have just said, “Salt Lake County has come up with a plan. Summit County, we’d like you to agree to it.”? How complete is it? The transport time via rail from Brighton to Park City is estimated at 10-30 minutes. The cost from Brighton to Park City is estimated at at $730 million to $960 million. Wait, I thought we didn’t know costs?
To be fair, there are a number of different concepts presented including Bus, Bus Rapid Transit, Rail, and Aerial (gondola). Yet, everything we have heard at Mountain Accord meetings parrots the Salt Lake County plan. There are over 144 pages with details. As we readily admit, we aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed, so Park Rag readers, as you read this document let us know what we missed and what Summit County citizens should digest from this document. Please email me with any thoughts you have and the Park Rag will make sure your opinions are heard.
To us, after reading this document, it seems the Mountain Accord is an attempt to co-opt local governments, local organizations, and local people into Salt Lake County’s view of the future. They wrap this in the thinly cloaked veil of protecting our watershed. Our questions are, which interests are really being served by Mountain Accord, and given how dirty this all feels, do we really want to be a part of it?
We’ll leave you with a couple of charts from the MTS Document and a little commentary:
In Salt Lake County’s lowest-growth estimate (first chart), the number of vehicles in Little Cottonwood Canyon will grow by a total of 10% by 2030 (15 years from now). In the second chart, it shows growth over the last 12 years at about a total of 2%. So even their most conservative estimate isn’t likely conservative enough. Unless, of course, Mountain Accord can get that train going up Little Cottonwood with a tunnel to Park City, which will help Salt Lake County meet their apparent goal of filling up every last inch of the Wasatch with people.
At least we now know exactly which game we are playing.
Cognitive Dissonance in Summit County Government Over Mountain Accord
Yesterday on KPCW, Lynn Ware Peak interviewed Summit County Manager Tom Fisher. She asked a question about Mountain Accord:
Tom Fisher (Summit County Manager): “You know I think there is certainly a lot of conversation about that, and the [Summit County] Council is leaning toward that. We’ll have further discussion about that as the next couple of months move on. In my personal view, its very important if someone is planning for our area, we need to be at the table, participating in that planning, so we represent ourselves.”
In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values. I think this describes the Summit County Council and County Manager to a tee. They know what the people want, yet they can’t even say it.
What I would have liked Mr Fisher to say is “I know that most citizens who have followed the Mountain Accord in Summit County are against it. Yet, they may not understand the implications of bowing out of the Accord. This could impact our roads, our access to other state services, and how members of the legislature may punish Summit County for leaving the Mountain Accord process. Therefore, while we don’t like the Mountain Accord any more than you do, we must stay in it for the common good.”
Instead we get platitudes like “keeping a seat at the table.”
Please just treat us as grown ups and tell us the truth. We can handle it.
The Grapes of Wrath … Park City Style
I love the taste of dirt in the afternoon:
in Environment
Park City School District Releases EPA Report on Treasure Mountain School Soil
Last fall, the EPA tested soil at Treasure Mountain Junior High School. The EPA report found that lead levels were elevated in some of the soil but that a top layer was protecting this lead from reaching the surface. The EPA says:
“Given the School District’s plan to renovate, or possibly remove the School Building entirely, it would be prudent for the EPA to work with the School to manage the handling of the contaminated soil and facilitate its proper disposal. To this end the EPA will, in conjunction with the School’s actual renovation, excavate and remove contaminated soil as needed and ensure that at least 6 inches of a clean cover material exist over all areas of the property upon completion of the final project.”
There is more information in the Data Assessment on the school district’s web site.
What Zions National Park Could Teach Us About Mountain Accord
As many people know, Mountain Accord has proposed rail up Little Cottonwood Canyon.
I received an email from a Friend of the Park Rag about Zions National Park . The person makes the case that Zions has over 3 million visitors per year and does it all with Buses (and not rail). Visitors are not allowed to drive in most of the park.
I wonder why this idea hasn’t been proposed in Little Cottonwood Canyon as part of Mountain Accord? OK, I’m pretty sure I know why … but if our true goal is preserving the Wasatch, wouldn’t a fleet of natural gas buses be a lot more eco-friendly than electric trains powered by coal power plants, while still allowing cars to go up the canyon?
Here is the email:
Hey Park Rag,
According to the Zion National Park website:
“In 1997, visitation was 2.4 million and increasing. The shuttle system was established to eliminate traffic and parking problems, protect vegetation, and restore tranquility to Zion Canyon.”
“Visitation more than doubled between 1982 and 2002, from 1.25 million to 2.59 million. Backcountry use has risen even more quickly: from 7,807 people camping in the backcountry in 1986 to 21,002 in 1999.”
“In 2004, nearly 2.7 million people visited Zion.”
“In 2014 approximately 3,211,596 people visited Zion NP.”
That’s with shuttles, no trains🙂
I looked up the stats on number of people going up Little Cottonwood Canyon each year and as of 2012, UDOT estimates about 2 million cars per year travel the canyon. If you go with the average of about 1.8 persons per car, that’s 3.6 million people per year. If Zions can do it, and frankly Little Cottonwood Canyon’s roads aren’t too different that Zions, I don’t see why this isn’t contender #1 for the solution.
Why do I say that? Mostly because it won’t cost $3 billion and it’s been proven to work in Utah.
Price of Water Going Up
I opened a letter from Summit Water Distribution yesterday. It was the standard annual shareholder’s letter I get every year. Yet this year, hidden in envelope, was a trojan horse — a notice from the water company that prices were going up 20% per year. This could mean an increase of $11-$18 per month. I understand that water is getting more expensive generally (nationwide it rose 6% this year on average) but any increase over $10 a month is real money — or as I like to call it — a subscription to Netflix or HBO.
It made me start to think back to the increases we’ve seen over the past few years. If you recall, Summit County increased Snyderville Basin residents’ taxes by about $10 per month in 2012. The School District also raised taxes by about $9 per month in 2012 and raised them $2 dollars more in 2014. Last year Basin Rec put forth a bond that raised taxes by $10 per month. Now it looks like water will be about $15 more per month. Then in November it is likely the School Board will ask voters to vote on a big bond that could raise taxes $10-$20 more per month.
While none of these changes by themselves sounds bad, you start to add it up, and it’s $50 per month. You can do a lot with that kind of money.
Parkrag
We believe in citizen journalism. We believe there are stories to tell that can help to shape our community for the better. We believe tomorrow's Park City can be better than today's.