New Developments from FollowtheMoneyProvo.com. A MUST READ!

My thanks goes out to Dave Knecht for staying on top of the current race and providing rock-solid information about the finances of this race. I'm going to borrow some of his information that he has just in case you do not check his site regularly.

The first piece of information is a voicemail left by John Curtis on Dave's phone about BCR Political (the organization Brian Chapman, John's campaign manager, is associated with) funding the StopCindy.com campaign. Please follow the link below to listen to the conversation yourself. I found it very interesting that Mr. Curtis would say to Dave "not to trust what the Daily Herald has to say." Also, the usually clear talking Curtis seems very unorganized and clearly doesn't have confidence in what he is saying:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MollfVsj29M&feature=player_embedded

The other piece of information from FollowtheMoneyProvo.com is an interesting picture taken from a StopCindy.com event held this morning (October 31st). Taylor Oldroyd's van is decked out to show his absolute hatred of Cindy Richards, but what is a surprise is the man in the white hat (whom I have surrounded with a red box). Who is this man, and why should you care? The man in this picture is Dave Cabanilla, husband of Laura Cabanilla who is running for a City Council seat against Coy Porter. And who is helping to fund Mrs. Cabanilla's race against Coy Porter? The Utah County Association of Realtors AND Taylor Oldroyd, who are the creators of the StopCindy.com campaign. But this is not all, because all of the parties involved are also ardent supporters of John Curtis' campaign for mayor.



Stop buying the lie that Curtis is trying to sell when he states he is not involved with some of the most dirty politics Provo has EVER seen. Special interest is trying to buy your City, so make sure on November 3rd you send a strong message that our City, schools, and neighborhoods are NOT FOR SALE!

Curtis’ Last-Ditch Rhetorical Attempt at Political Salvation, Part III: Unity

Unity: How will I promote the motto “In unity there is strength”? (And sadly, once again, ladies and gentlemen, apparently Mr. Curtis doesn’t realize that in order to have unity, it calls for the simple word ‘we’ rather than the letter ‘I’.)

Involvement and Teamwork will be brought back to Provo City issues.

I have discussed this piece of rhetoric already in the blog post Amplitudo Epitome, under Mr. Curtis’ expectation that he will “find common ground to bridge that which divides us.” [1] There is a great amount of teamwork and involvement in Provo City; not only amongst employees and citizens, but almost amongst elected officials. There are, however, some very well-known feuds between certain Council members, and Mayor Billings has, over time, shown little patience from some elected officials, city employees, and citizens alike. Yet, when we take a step back and look at the entire situation, we can say for a political realm, our problems really are not that bad. Could there be more teamwork? Yes. Could we have more involvement in civic matters from the citizenry and elected officials alike? Most definitely. Can Mr. Curtis come in and magically make everyone work together? Absolutely not. Mr. Curtis can be an example to others, but he cannot force people to become involved or to work in teams. For him to say these attributes “will be brought back into Provo City issues” is, once again, an empty promise that may possibly never come to fruition. Mr. Curtis and this community should realize, more than any other people, that people have their individual agency to act as they please, and there is nothing Mr. Curtis can do to change that. People of Provo, he CANNOT promise you that involvement and teamwork will be at the center of issues in our City, only individuals can bring these attributes to the table.

Treat all 38 neighborhoods with respect giving each the time and tools they need to succeed.

I find this statement not only confusing by highly ambiguous. Who is saying that we are not treating our neighborhoods with ‘respect’? Maybe Mr. Curtis is considering neighborhoods where he deems the big, bad City is implementing zoning restrictions in order to save deteriorating neighborhoods from ruin. Yet I am not opposed at the City giving ‘time’ to the neighborhoods, because that is why the City is present in the first place: to take care of the citizenry. Yet what type of ‘tools’ is Mr. Curtis talking about? This is yet another ambiguous talking point that could easily equate to placing more financial pressure on our very weak budget. The current state of our budget, including its long-term revenue sources, will not stand up to the pressures of increased services, training, equipment, and ‘tools’ that Mr. Curtis seeks to implement. It would be similar to having a 1,000 pound sumo wrestler standing on the shoulders of a 90-year old woman with osteoporosis. Our budget cannot tolerate the high financial weight of his ambitious and ambiguous plans.

Also, I’m sure Mr. Curtis would fire back that he believes we shouldn’t be giving all of our attention to select neighborhoods. He stated during a debate that he felt we needed to give the same time and attention to all neighborhoods, not just some select few that are currently receiving a high amount of attention. Some may nod their head in approval to this statement, but I consider it quite hilarious. Neighborhoods are, in many ways, like people. They are living, breathing appendages of our community; when one is not working correctly or has societal ills within it, the rest of the neighborhoods suffer as a result. Steve Clark sums up this point very well when he has stated: We are only as strong as our weakest neighborhood. Yet Mr. Curtis seems to think that we need to give all the neighborhoods the same amount of attention (as if they could become jealous and throw a temper tantrum). Mr. Curtis’ plan would be similar to a doctor giving the same amount of attention to a perfectly healthy patient as he does to a patient with terminal cancer. The fact of the matter is that some neighborhoods need more attention than others; some neighborhoods are old while others are new, and the older neighborhoods generally have more infrastructure, social, and financial troubles than new, bustling neighborhoods. There is no EOE when it comes to neighborhoods: you find the problems, gather the information needed, and then triage the problem until it is gone.

Promote a Partnership with BYU and others to find win-win solutions for parking and student housing.

Mr. Curtis really does not get it when BYU is thrown into the mix. The current situation with parking and student housing is NOT an issue that the City of Provo can fix without considerable trouble from both school administration and the student body. This is because the situation was created by BYU, NOT the City of Provo. The slight oversight Mr. Curtis has when it comes to BYU is that the current 2-mile radius of approved housing was a policy implemented by BYU without consultation or approval from the City of Provo. In fact, BYU has not revisited this policy to make necessary changes to some very large holes in their initial plan. BYU is the key player in this issue, and if BYU doesn’t want to make any changes to their current methods and system of approved housing, then the City of Provo is simply along for the ride. The City could implement stricter zoning codes and regulations within the 2-mile radius, but this would only cause further contention between the student body and the City.

Mr. Curtis wants you to think that he will be able to sit down with BYU officials and find “win-win” solutions to the entire housing/parking debacle that has plagued this City for decades. What he doesn’t realize is that we have two very different entities (the City of Provo and BYU) with two very different missions (Provo wants stable, family-friendly neighborhoods; BYU wants housing for their students in any way, shape, or form, as long as it is ‘approved’). The likelihood of these two entities meeting on common ground is not very likely, as the easiest way for this situation to come to an amiable conclusion is for BYU to take the initiative to provide more ground rules on housing quality. Since the neighborhoods affected by the 2-mile radius will continue to have disproportionate amounts of students when compared to owner-occupants, thereby detracting from the single-family neighborhood, there really never can be a true “win-win” situation. Mr. Curtis may try to tell you that he will establish a SCAMP development, but since multiple attempts have failed, using nearly every methodology imaginable, his promises will likely fall flat.

[1] http://whoisjohncurtis.blogspot.com/2009/10/amplitudo-epitome.html

Curtis’ Last-Ditch Rhetorical Attempt at Political Salvation, Part II: Prosperity

Prosperity: How will I build a strong financial foundation for Provo City? (Once again, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Curtis CANNOT build a strong financial foundation for our community alone. He will need the help of every citizen in our community and the backing of our Municipal Council.)

Commit to economic transparency – keeping economic policy open, simple, and transparent.

The difficulty with this statement is that you will need to find a way to make economic policy “open” AND “simple” for everyone to understand. The economics behind municipal financing is not an easy subject to understand; there is a lot more at play than simply balancing your checkbook. There are different funds, bonds, revenues sources, and expenses than we have to deal with in the private sector or in our own homes. It is true that the City Council and Mayor should be forthright with our current economic decisions and make open suggestions to the people of how to rectify problems before voting. However, our Council and Mayor already do all of this. Our current problem in Provo is the apathy of people in our City to municipal processes. If more people would come to Council Meetings; talk to their elected leaders OUTSIDE of an election year; and demand responsiveness and accountability from both elected and employed personnel of the City this would never be an issue. This is, once again, a mute point that Mr. Curtis is trying to remake into his own brainchild.

Measure and identify every dollar spent with a commitment to live within our means.

This is a very sneaky way of saying that Mr. Curtis is going to micromanage everything in the City of Provo. But Mr. Curtis doesn’t want to say micromanage because it has a very negative connotation to it, as it should. When you micromanage a City, department, or personnel, you are simply attempting to “manage or control with excessive attention to minor details.” [1] Very few individuals work well under the pressure that every detail of their work, even the minor attributes of their position (like the time you take to use the bathroom) are monitored to ensure that every penny is being spent in a ‘measureable’ and ‘productive’ manner. And you know what they say, when you are so focused on the small things, you generally miss out on the big picture. Mr. Curtis has openly stated that he will ensure, under his careful watch, that there is no waste within the City, but how does he expect to do that unless he micromanages every aspect of City operations? Also, the latter part of this campaign statement, to “live within our means” is a mute point. The City Budget, by law, needs to be balanced per State Law. The Municipal Council continually, throughout the fiscal year, addressed the budget and various department heads give reports to the Mayor’s Office who, in turn, gives the updates financials to the Council. The rules and playbook are already in place to “live within our means,” unless Mr. Curtis is talking about either cutting City services that cost too much or raising taxes to meet the current financial need of our City.

Long term planning to better ensure the right type of growth, recruit good businesses, and help our current businesses prosper.

I’m honestly surprised that Mr. Curtis didn’t place his desire for a ’20-year vision’ here. For reasons I believe his 20-year vision is simply a talking point and not a real plan, please read my post John Curtis: Neither Good nor Great. [2] However, the issue that Mr. Curtis never wants to face is the FACT that the City already has measures in place for long-term planning, and his desire to speed up the processes around long-term planning show his lack of knowledge concerning the issue. You see, Mr. Curtis looks at everything in government through the eyes of a businessman, which is dangerous for the people of Provo. A city is not a business, and it never will be. A city takes the opinions, desires, and needs of an entire PEOPLE, whereas a business will start operations in a market in order to deliver a specific service or product to a specific type of consumer. A city and government, however, does not have the luxury. The City of Provo needs to deliver all services to all people of Provo in an equal and concise manner; hence the presence of a bureaucracy to ensure that rules and structure are followed to usurp attempts to the contrary.

Mr. Curtis can and will, if he is mayor, seek to recruit various types of businesses to our community. He could also make the process of starting a business here in Provo easier and assist current businesses either through changes to the administrative processes of the City or suggesting new legislation to the Council. He cannot, however, make a long-term vision or plan for the City without consent of the people or four votes from the Council. In order to do this, he would need to define what he means by “right type of growth” and how this fits into his personal vision. Want to hear about it now? You won’t have much luck, since he wants to keep you thinking of the changes you want in our City, and then he will seek to implement the changes he wants (similar to a certain candidate who extolled ‘hope’ and ‘change’, which meant a million different things to a million different people). Don’t believe me? What did Mr. Curtis state at the very beginning of this blog and how we can build a strong financial foundation in Provo? The answer: only through him.

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/micromanage

[2] http://whoisjohncurtis.blogspot.com/2009/10/john-curtis-neither-good-nor-great.html

Curtis’ Last-Ditch Rhetorical Attempt at Political Salvation, Part I: Safety

I have in my possession one of Curtis’ door hangers that is going throughout the entire City of Provo this weekend as the final blitzkrieg of campaign activity is well underway. I want to address each of Curtis’ issues on this document, and I suggest reading a previous post titled Amplitudo Epitome which covered very similar subjects early on in the campaign. [1] This documents, which is broken up into Curtis’ three favorite words (Safety, Prosperity, and Unity), revisits some old points and addresses some new, unheard points. This post will be split into three separate posts, due to length.

Safety: How will I make our neighborhoods safe? (On a side note, ladies and gentlemen, Curtis cannot make our neighborhoods safe by himself. Only WE can make them safe.)

No Gangs in Provo Plan: through Prevention, Suppression, and Rehabilitation. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT be sucked in by this absolute half-truth. The three-step plan IS NOT Curtis’ unique idea of how to fight gang activity, but is a commonly and currently used method of law enforcement all around the world. For Curtis to grandstand the ideal that there can be ‘no gangs in Provo’ is, sadly, not realistic. In the society we currently live in, there will always be individuals who prey on others through drugs, violence, and criminal activity; even if people were equal in all things, people would still try to cheat and steal in order to get more than their neighbor. This doesn’t mean we have to succumb to individuals who finance their lives on the suffering of others, but to believe that there can be no gangs in Provo is a wishy-washy fairytale conjured up by John Curtis and his campaign strategists. He wants you to feel safe under his plan, but the REALITY of the matter is that no elected official, not even the police, can promise you that any plan they implement can eliminate gangs from our community. The methods we take may reduce gang activity, but there will always be people present who will attempt to usurp law and order. Mr. Curtis does not have the capacity, knowledge, or expertise to even begin a plan to eliminate gangs in our community, and I submit there is no individual on the world that can eliminate gangs from society. If you are wondering why, that is because if there was a sure plan or individual who could eliminate gangs, then gangs would have been gone a long time ago.

Stop Increasing Trend of Drug Use: Equipping our police with the proper tools – Narcotics K-9 Unit, Technology, and Training. For some background on this subject matter, please read the story on my blog titled Gentleman in a Green Sweater makes Curtis Sweat. [2] I will be the first to admit that I would love our police officers to never want for anything; just as I would like to see the same with our schools, recreational outlets, non-profit organizations, and a whole host of other institutions and organizations. However, in the real world, we all have to live within something called a budget. This simple word causes Mr. Curtis to immediately enter a state of frustration and anger, because a budget limits his ability to blow pixie dust into the brains of Provo citizens. What Mr. Curtis is talking about here (i.e. developing a narcotics K-9 unit, including necessary training and technology for all Provo police officers to fight drug use in our community) will literally cost the City of Provo, meaning the taxpayers, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. Do not believe that our current budget can sustain changes that Mr. Curtis wants to implement, because it cannot; and no matter how much Mr. Curtis will want to tell you he can simply run the government like a business, he cannot because the laws and ordinances which create the Mayor’s position will stop him from making risky investments like he would in the business world. If you think Mr. Curtis can provide this step in his plan without taxing you, raising utility rates, or cutting City services, then you are very wrong.

Unite Neighborhoods through Mobile Watch to fight gateway crimes like graffiti and keep our families safe. This idea, to Mr. Curtis’ credit, is a great start, but does have an inherent flaw that cannot make it a reliable part of a mayoral plan. For those of you who do not know about Mobile Watch, you really should read up about it, and I have provided a link to their main website for your convenience. [3] The same aspect that makes this organization great also makes it not realistic for a solid municipal plan, that being this “aggressive crime prevention program” relies solely upon volunteers. Most of these volunteers patrol their neighborhoods on Friday and Saturday night (when most crimes take place), and will scan their neighborhoods for suspicious activity. Special patrols can also intervene during any time of the day to ensure the neighborhoods are safe. However, crimes do not occur only on the weekends, and criminals, like viruses, can adapt to meet the difficulties of their host. It is important that individual citizens take an active role in the safety of their communities, but you cannot force them to play the part. Curtis would need to somehow convince citizens, who work 9-5 and have families to tend to during the weekend, to give up four hours of their evening to watch for suspicious activity in their neighborhoods. It is not impossible, but it would be difficult. However, to say we will unite neighborhoods through this program is assuming that each neighborhood will automatically endorse and fully support it. Now that, ladies and gentlemen, may be impossible.


[1] http://whoisjohncurtis.blogspot.com/2009/10/amplitudo-epitome.html

[2] http://whoisjohncurtis.blogspot.com/2009/10/gentleman-in-green-sweater-makes-curtis.html

[3] http://www.policevolunteers.org/programs/index.cfm?fa=dis_pro_detail&id=2358

Gentleman in a Green Sweater makes Curtis Sweat

On Mr. Curtis’ campaign website under the Rumors section, there is an interesting note directed towards a “gentleman in the green sweater.” [1] The note states the following:

“Last night I responded poorly to your question. In hindsight I was harsh and unfairly critical of your question. I hope you will accept my apology and give me another chance to answer your question.” [1]

Since this was posted on Friday, October 30, I looked to see what campaign events were present that Mr. Curtis was speaking at. Last night in the Grandview Neighborhood, both John Curtis and Steve Clark were speaking at the Westridge Elementary School at a debate moderated by Quin Monson, Assistant Professor of Political Science at BYU. Since I was not at this event, I tried to call some friends, family, and associates in the area to see if they had attended the debate. Through the grapevine, I found out a little more about this story and am surprised about what happened.

As the debate was ending, Dr. Monson opened the floor to the audience to ask questions of the candidates. Only a few questions were asked, but the very last question was asked by a young man, probably in his early to mid-20s, wearing a green hooded sweater. The question he asked was directed towards Mr. Curtis and it was concerning the current budget situation of Provo. From those I talked with, they said the question was in regards to how John planned to pay for increased police training, increased recreational activities provided by the City, and additional training for City employees. This young man also gave some background information about Provo’s budget, such as the nearly $3 million deficit the City is currently operating and how 45% of the General Fund is funded through a now negative Sales Tax revenue.

The manner in which Mr. Curtis responded to this question shocked the people I talked with, as they said John immediately began to badger the young man with questions of “where did you hear I was going to increase the size of the police?” and “where have I said that I’m going to spend money on recreational activities?” I don't know if these are the direct quotes, since I was not present, but I am told that the young man quoted lines from Mr. Curtis’ website, gave figures about start-up costs to fund additional police officers, and reiterated his question of how Mr. Curtis was going to pay for the changes he had talked about throughout the campaign. Those present told me that John raised his voice and adopted a very angry demeanor, criticizing the young man stating that he was not going to increase the size of government in Provo. John did agree that the Sale Tax revenue source was poor, but offered no suggestion of how to solve the current situation. The young man, relating from an earlier statement from Mr. Curtis that he was going to reduce waste, then asked how John expected to micromanage from department-to-department in order to cut waste to fund his projects, and asked how this would provide the funds to take Provo into a better future. This is where my informants stated that John became very angry and nearly yelled the following:

“You see, it doesn’t take money to make a better future for Provo! In my business, we have made huge decisions which didn’t cost any money, and it made our future much better, and I’m going to do the same thing for the City!”

After this, Mr. Curtis sat down and the debate ended. Some then told me that John’s wife, Sue, approached the young man and tried to clarify John’s positions about the budget. The young man, apparently, then told Sue that he was shocked by John’s lack of professionalism and that he would even dare to attack someone who had asked him a straightforward question during a debate.

Obviously Mr. Curtis had some time to reflect on the manner in which he spoke to this young man who simply asked a relevant question concerning the fiscal state of our City. Is this what we are to expect of Mr. Curtis if he is Mayor, that he will heckle any individual who begins to ask hard, straightforward questions of him? I find it convenient that Mr. Curtis is hoping that this young man will read his website and take him up on an offer to talk about the issues in private, when he could have easily pulled the young man aside AFTER the debate and made amends. This event only shows what I’ve been trying to say all along, that Mr. Curtis is neither a professional nor a leader. When approached with hard questions or facts that contradict his campaign opinions, he becomes angry or blames an elaborate smear campaign against his good name. Guess what, Mr. Curtis? You SMEARED a young man who was simply asking you a question, and I hope the young man doesn’t take you up on your apology. Hopefully many Provo citizens will see him going door-to-door for Steve Clark to tell as many people as possible what kind of ‘leader’ you really are. You said it yourself: “ask people what kind of person I am.” I’m sure this young man’s opinion of you is not going to reflect the mountain you’ve attempted to build out of a molehill.

[1] http://www.johncurtis.org/rumors.html

Chicago Politics: Courtesy of John Curtis

Upon deeper searching of John Curtis’ financial disclosures, some interesting names popped up that I did not recognize. The names Bill and James Provencher and Patrick Tovey showed up on Curtis’ financials; no public records linked these individuals to Provo or even the State of Utah, for that matter. Yet they are playing an important financial role in Curtis’ campaign for Mayor, as he gained $15,000 total ($5,000 from each) for his campaign. But if they are not from Provo or Utah, where are they from? For your answer try looking towards Tinley Park, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago.

These three unknown individual run a business known as Carey’s Range Ventilation [1], and deem themselves as “indoor [shooting] range specialists.” [2] The question I have is actually quite simple: how does Mr. Curtis know these individuals and why are they donating such high amounts of money for a mayoral campaign which is not home to their business? Why is John Curtis seeking financial assistance outside of the realm of Provo AND the State of Utah? And why would people in a city notorious for underhanded politics be interesting in our community?

Maybe I could just be overreacting? On Carey’s website, they have a section dedicated to a partnership between this business and Curtis’ business, Action Target, since 2003. [3] Action Target brings the shooting range equipment while Carey’s brings the necessary ventilation equipment. And since they are partners, why not hand over $15,000 as a goodwill gesture towards a business partner, right? Yet the question has yet to be answered where this money was spent on Curtis’ campaign, and the money trail, as it always does, tells a more sinister story worthy of the title Chicago Politics.

Coupled with Carey’s donation of $15,000 and Action Target’s donations of $12,500 ($2,500 from the corporation; $5,000 each from Kyle Bateman and Addison Sovine), making a grand total of $27,500. In the previous article I talked about how Curtis is directly tied to notorious smear campaigns rampant throughout the Provo elections, and these monies show an interesting balance. Curtis’ campaign spent $27,437 on political campaign strategists; individuals like BCR Political, Randy Minson, Nate Rathbun, Orange Soda, and Complete Campaigns. Curtis has tried to sell to the people of Provo that he is running a grassroots campaign, but the money is telling a different story. John Curtis is not opposed to seeking the financial and political backing of individuals outside of Provo and Utah; people and businesses who do not understand our culture, traditions, government, or society. Look at what out-of-state speculators have done to our real estate market and neighborhoods; can you imagine what out-of-state politicians, strategists, and financial backers will do to our community?

As the money trail continues to grow and points towards shadowy figures, organizations, and causes, more and more people in Provo are starting to question whether John Curtis actually has the right path for Provo. Is Mr. Curtis concerned about the individual citizens of our community; their opinions and dreams; and their desires for the future? Or is Mr. Curtis going to throw aside the citizens of Provo in order to compensate those who financed his campaign into the most powerful political office in Utah County? If Mr. Curtis is elected mayor and you see special interests beginning to rule the community, you only have yourself to blame. The facts are before you, because Mr. Curtis certainly will not give you the whole truth.

[1] http://www.careyscentral.com/home.html

[2] http://www.careyscentral.com/home.html

[3] http://www.careyscentral.com/home.html

Curious Financial Disclosures

In the Daily Herald, an article of interest came up titled PAC files amended financial disclosures. [1] This article talks about how Taylor Oldroyd (CEO of the Utah County Association of Realtors, Chairman of the Utah County Republican Party, and leader of the PAC behind stopcindy.com) changed his financial report “showing fewer donations and no payments to consulting firm BCR Political.” [1] The original statement filed by Taylor Oldroyd showed that “60 percent of the listed expenditures, $3,644, went to BCR, which is also involved in several local races.” [1] What is the big deal about BCR Political being involved with a PAC devoted to unseating a current-seated city council member? Brian Chapman, John Curtis’ high-paid campaign manager ($14,027, to be exact), is an integral part of BCR Political. [2] Even more interesting is the fact that BCR Political also gives support services to Progress Provo, a PAC created by Councilman Steve Turley to unseat Councilwoman Cindy Richards from office. [4] Yet this is not all, Progress Provo who has received assistance from BCR Political and Brian Chapman is also receiving support from John Curtis. Mr. Curtis listed Progress Provo as one of his sponsors, meaning he believes in their cause and endorses them fully. [5]

This mad rush by both Taylor Oldroyd and Brian Chapman to call this debacle an “accounting issue” is no more than an outright lie. [1] From the time stopcindy.com came online and the PAC started operations in Provo City, John Curtis sought to distance himself from his former campaign manager (yes that would be Taylor Oldroyd) by stating he was not a part of the stopcindy.com PAC. In fact, he tried to say people thought he was involved “because some [people] saw the ‘StopCindy.com’ signs near mine.” [3] Actually, Mr. Curtis, it wasn’t your campaign signs that raised people’s eyebrows, it was the fact that you paid Brian Chapman and BCR Political to head your campaign. Even more interesting is that the Utah County Association of Realtors was the “primary funding” for the stopcindy.com campaign [1], which also happens to be directly supporting John Curtis’ campaign for mayor. [2]

The old saying ‘the chickens are coming home to roost’ is becoming a common adage for the Curtis campaign. Nearly one-third of Curtis’ campaign contributions came from outside of Provo City, and the list of special interest groups and PACs is staggering. [2] It is interesting that Mr. Curtis felt that he needed to outspend his opponent 2-to-1 in order to get his name known in the community, mainly through hiring dirty campaign managers who have their thumbs dipped into negative campaigning and PACs. When the pressure became too much for the campaign and efforts to follow the money trail, such as www.followthemoneyprovo.com, started to show interesting alliances forming, Curtis’ campaign is now depending on the deception of an “accounting issue” to save face. Regardless of whether BCR Political and Brian Chapman are not involved with stopcindy.com, they are still providing financial and professional support to Sterling Beck and Laura Cabanilla for council seats. And the cherry on top: both of these candidates are fully supporting John Curtis for Mayor of Provo. However, Mr. Curtis will try to tell you that he is not “running as a ticket” with other candidates, because he just believes “some of the candidates tend to line up with [his] political philosophy.” [3] Or are they harkening to the master’s call, those who are writing the checks, Mr. Curtis?

How many more outright lies can Curtis’ campaign keep feeding the people of Provo? When pressures become high and evidence begins to be laid out, Curtis’ campaign minions begin to espouse the ‘shrugging shoulders’ theory. Yet there is something you should know about municipal government and that is the words you can NEVER trust from elected leaders: “I never heard it; I never knew about it; it’s not my fault.” Brian Chapman, Taylor Oldroyd, BCR Political, Steve Turley, the Utah County Association of Realtors, stopcindy.com PAC, Progress Provo, and John Curtis are all interrelated. They may try to cover up financial disclosures in an attempt to show there isn’t a major push of special interest in our community to get John Curtis elected to mayor (and other council candidates as well), but the truth is out there. John Curtis has surrounded himself not by the people of Provo, but rather the special interest of Provo. If this is your idea of Mr. Curtis being transparent, honest, and forthright about his campaign, then you have set your standards very, very low.

[1] http://heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/article_a3e01645-a036-5a07-8e3c-be14660d94fe.html

[2] http://heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/article_edce2cf6-61d1-5393-a48c-300d1dffb807.html

[3] http://www.johncurtis.org/rumors.html

[4] http://www.bcrpolitical.com/BCR/Campaigns.html

[5]http://www.heraldextra.com/article_f9b9d59d-e19b-59e9-bca9-8efabfe09f60.html

John Curtis: Neither Good nor Great

“A good leader inspires people to have confidence in the leader; a great leader inspires people to have confidence in themselves.”

As the mayoral race in Provo is now coming to an end, voters need to ask themselves whether the candidates can be considered a leader for Provo. Leadership has many definitions, but the quote I found stated at the beginning of this post sums up leadership quite well. You can have a good leader, but you can also have a great leader. The people of Provo need to have the innate ability to trust the Mayor, as the responsibilities of this office are far reaching throughout all sectors and facets of our community.

John Curtis has been campaigning now for nearly one year, going door-to-door, becoming a household name. People know him, have seen his signs, and he has attended multiple community and civic events in Provo. What Mr. Curtis has been doing is trying to show the people that they can have confidence in him to lead their city; that he is trustworthy and responsible to hold a calling of such high importance. Mr. Curtis is not afraid to brag about the large number of high-profile supporters that have, over the past year, attached their names to his campaign. These people obviously trust Mr. Curtis to be a good leader and have a degree of confidence in him.

Yet what is to be said of Mr. Curtis being a great leader for Provo? Has Mr. Curtis inspired the people of Provo to not only believe in his ability to lead, but to encourage people to have confidence in themselves, their neighborhoods, and in their City? Mr. Curtis is quoted as saying that the people of Provo “can’t assume that Provo is the safe place that we would like it to be and that we think it is.” He is essentially saying that the people of Provo, despite their best efforts, cannot believe that they are living in a safe community. They cannot have confidence in their abilities to solve issues within their neighborhoods and schools. However, they can have confidence in Mr. Curtis’ ability to reduce a supposed gang epidemic in our community through his three-point plan. Yet, recent reports from Mayor Billings’ address to the City have stated that gang related crimes and graffiti as a whole are both down in dramatic numbers. The mixture of well-trained police officers and strong neighborhoods has brought these numbers down, not the singular acts of a politician.

Mr. Curtis has talked vehemently about his desire for a 20-year vision for our City. He states that the General Plan has “failed us.” Without ever pointing to the people of Provo which sections of this Plan have failed us, Mr. Curtis is asking for the authority to dictate to an entire city what vision should be held for the future of our neighborhoods. Even Mr. Curtis admitted during the Edgemont Neighborhood meeting that as he has gone door-to-door asking people where they would like to see the City in 20-years and, as a result, he received a different answer with every person. Mr. Curtis is not asking the people of Provo for their input in this matter, he is asking for authority to make a decision for you. He does not want your input, just your vote to give him the right to tell you where your City is going to be headed for the next two decades. Wouldn’t a great leader seek from his people their strengths in forming a plan that will directly affect their futures and wellbeing, or would he sit in a room of people who believe as he does in order to form a personal vision for over 100,000 people?

In matters of governance, Mr. Curtis has stated that the form of government established within our City (also known as a Strong Mayor/Council Form of Government) is meant to have tension between both the Mayor and Council. Strangely enough, a statement such as this shows he has neither confidence in himself or in the Council members that he may be working with to lead and guide the City. Tension in any organization, especially political, never yields positive consequences. For those of you who disagree please show me the merit in the current debacle on Capitol Hill where tension dominates reason. Tension between the two separate, yet equal, branches of government in Provo City (Administrative and Legislative) is like a check engine light on your vehicle. It is a sign that something is amiss. If Mr. Curtis truly believes that tension must be present in order for the two most important organizations in our community to function, then he has neither confidence in the individuals he will work with or that they can have confidence in him.

In my opinion, I do believe there are many, many people who have confidence in Mr. Curtis to lead and guide this City for the next four years. However, does Mr. Curtis have confidence in those people to also lead and guide their City for the next four years, or does he simply believe that this ability will come from his office alone?

The Stresses of Provo

This evening, the Edgemont neighborhood held a debate at the Timpanogos Elementary School where Steve Clark, John Curtis, and a few individuals seeking Council seats came to answer questions. I was disappointed that the candidates were only able to answer a few questions each and most of the issues were those that have been asked at nearly every public venue since the primaries (i.e. Economic Development, constructing a recreation center, etc.). There was, however, a point of interest during the introductions of the evening. Mr. Curtis made a point of telling the audience that the process candidates going through while seeking public office in this City is grueling and stressful, but he has learned a great deal from his time on the streets talking with people. He stated that the stress is a great weight loss tool (having almost lost seven pounds) and it is causing many a sleepless night. He also stated that he will be relieved when November 3rd is gone and can finally get some sleep.

No one doubts that the process of running for elected office is stressful; Provo is not alone in the refiner’s fire of purging candidates about their past and current associations, plans, visions, and goals. This is the public testing the waters to see if they can trust an elected official with their neighborhoods and tax dollars. Criticism has fallen hard on Curtis, some may say because he has a flip-flopping past between political parties or refuses to provide concrete plans. Others might say that he is the victim of any individual who seeks to implement change in a society that holds engrained ideologies. Regardless of your perception of why criticism is directed towards Mr. Curtis, we can all agree that it is beginning to show on his demeanor.

What I believe Mr. Curtis fails to realize is that the hardest part of his journey is not the path leading to November 3rd, as he is looking to this day as a release from a majority of his current stresses and sorrows. November 4th is when the true stresses will begin for either John Curtis or Steve Clark, because right now both candidates are only concerned with garnering enough votes to obtain office. After being elected, they will need to worry about appeasing the entirety of Provo City, not just their constituents. Life right now is only a small hill to climb, but the Mayor’s direct responsibilities will be like scaling Mount Everest. If the trials and stresses of the campaign are causing you to lose weight and not sleep, Mr. Curtis, then if you are elected you will have four years of little-to-no sleep and may have to buy a new wardrobe to fit your new physique.

These new-found stresses to Mr. Curtis’ campaign might also be linked to a report released today by Mayor Lewis Billings about the state of our City. Mayor Billings announced that we are the safest City in Utah, with the lowest rate of property crimes and second-lowest (Orem had the lowest rate) in violent crimes. What came as a stunning blow to Curtis’ campaign is that Mayor Billings announced that instances of graffiti are down 36 percent compared to the same period of time in 2008. Gang activity, which has been fanned into the fire of a supposed epidemic by Mr. Curtis, was reported to be “down 49 percent from the same period last year.” [1] Billings also stated that “people should not assume that all graffiti is gang-related,” placing massive holes in Curtis’ belief that graffiti is linking a notorious street gang to our community. All of these data-based facts are a direct contradiction to Mr. Curtis’ assumption that he made at the Chamber of Commerce debate when he said “we can’t assume that Provo is the safe place that we would like it to be and that we think it is.” Mr. Curtis, Provo is a safe community, and your “facts” about gang activity and lack of safety in our community is showing its true colors: sensationalism meant to instill fear in the hearts of people, which is nothing but an elaborate charade of lies and deceit. You should be stressed, Mr. Curtis, because people are finally seeing who you really are.

[1] http://heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/article_acdab9fc-ebca-5fa0-b7e7-bcf7029ef00d.html

Which Story is True?

John Curtis, on his campaign website, has placed a new article in his rumors section about the recent mailer sent out by the Steve Clark for Mayor Campaign. This mailer showed that John Curtis had run as a Democrat for a State Senate seat and also Chaired and Vice-Chaired the Utah County Democrats. Mr. Curtis is claiming that this is a drastic attempt to stain his reputation and name by blankly labeling him as a Democrat, and that information like this has no place in a non-partisan race. He also claims that the Clark Campaign is delving into half-truths in regards to his political past, because, in his opinion, Mr. Curtis has always been and always will be a man of Republican values and beliefs.

My readers will know that, previous to this mailer, I have written two articles about this very issue, that of partisan politics in a non-partisan race. Does it have a place in this current mayoral race? To summarize my other two posts in three-words: absolutely, positively, and yes. This mailer isn’t about a smear campaign to discredit Curtis as an individual because he happened to run as a Democrat, then a Republican, and is now trying his luck at a non-partisan race; this is about a track record of honesty and sustaining core values. To flip-flop between the Democratic and Republican parties in the State of Utah is more than enough to raise a few eyebrows, but what Steve Clark is asking the people of Provo is simple: “What does John Curtis stand for?”

I invite you to read or re-read my two posts A Tale of Two Curtises and Dramatic Shift to the Right or Left for more detailed information about this issue. I also invite you to read Mr. Curtis’ explanation about why he feels this is not an issue on his website under the ‘Rumors’ section. Yet he still, in my mind, has not explained sufficiently why he made such drastic moves, as failing to gain public office in two different parties and trying your luck at a non-partisan race is more than curious. In summary, this curiosity comes from Mr. Curtis openly contradicting himself about his political background, as is shown below:




“I am running as a Utah County Democrat because the changes to the 2000 platform have brought it into close harmony with my core values.” [1]






"I've been a Republican my whole life...I joined a dramatic attempt to align the Utah County Democratic Party with Utah County values...My values have never changed. My beliefs have never changed." [2]


Two different stories, two very different backgrounds. There is no smear campaigning going on because Steve Clark is concerned about a candidate who is trying to jade his political background by openly deceiving the public about his positions, beliefs, and values. Let us remember that it wasn't Steve Clark who brought the issues of party politics into the fray, it was John Curtis trying to 'clear the air' about his political background. Just like in the court, Mr. Curtis, if you bring in evidence in an attempt to bolster your case, then you give your opposition the right to use it, also. People of Provo, which story are you going to believe, or are you going to allow Mr. Curtis to tell multiple stories about his political background and values? The choice is yours.


[1] http://www.ourcampaigns.com/cgi-bin/r.cgi/CandidateDetail.html?&CandidateID=13693

[2] http://www.deseretnews.com/article/650219973/2-vie-for-Provo-House-seat.html

Words of (un)Wisdom

Since the mayoral elections are coming up very soon, I decided to re-watch the mayoral debate from the Chamber of Commerce. Have you ever read a book, picked it up at a later date and then read something completely different that you didn’t read before? I had the same experience while watching this debate again, and I honestly cannot believe that I missed such a grand statement from Mr. John Curtis.

When the issue of Downtown Development was being discussed, Mr. Curtis was talking about his disdain for studies. He talked about how we have performed studies and done nothing as a result of them; even what he considers “simple changes” the City is not even touching (i.e. new signage, more advertising, etc.). But the biggest statement of all came when he stated, very clearly, the following:

“What we need to do to Downtown is to do is something. I don’t even care if it is wrong. In my business, we make mistakes all the time. We need to be prepared to make some mistakes Downtown and just do something.”

Honestly, the only word that is coming to mind is “wow.” After I heard this, I had to rewind, listen, and rewind again. I could not believe what I just heard. Some might say “we do need to start doing something and stop talking about it!” I agree that if we continue on our current route that nothing will happen, but reread what Mr. Curtis has stated. He plainly stated that he wants to do something, and he doesn’t even care if that “something” is completely wrong for Downtown! But be not afraid, little citizens of Provo, because Mr. Curtis is a businessman and in that world “[they] make mistakes all the time.”

You have heard me say it before, and I am going to say it again: this statement shows, unabashedly, that Mr. Curtis has absolutely NO understanding of municipal financing. Allow me to explain for those of you who are not catching my drift. If Mr. Curtis wanted to make a personal business move or investment with Action Target, he would weigh the cost versus benefits of any decision he would potentially make. He might invest hundreds, thousands, maybe even millions into a cause if he felt that it would yield a desirable return (he would ‘study’ the issues). However, if the investment did not yield the desired financial outcomes and he lost hundreds, thousands, or millions, only he would be out that much capital for his personal gain.

Now, let us compare this to a municipal organization. The City of Provo is funded by the tax-payer dollars of the citizenry, and these funds are continually watched to ensure they are safeguarded against fraud and waste. Now let’s say Mr. Curtis is elected as Mayor of Provo and he decides to implement his personal belief that we just need to do “something” in Downtown Provo, because he’s a businessman and knows that mistakes are made. Let’s say that he invests hundreds-of-thousands of dollars into infrastructure, signage, or some other item that isn’t needed and it yields nothing to benefit Downtown. The consequence of such a decision is that a large portion of tax-payer funds is now gone, but to John Curtis, that is simply the price of business.

This is why, ladies and gentlemen, you can’t run government like a business. When tax-payer dollars are financing operations, you need to be accountable to the people who are writing your checks. Mr. Curtis has yet to separate himself from the business persona; he is diluted into thinking that he can jump into the Mayor’s Office and frivolously spend tax-payer dollars for campaign goals and ambitions, regardless of the consequences. Why? Because he doesn’t care if the City does something wrong and wastes money in the process, because that is the reality of business. I’m going to be the pinch in your sugarplum world, Mr. Curtis. You are not running for a business, you are running for a political office. If you are elected and believe you can simply implement anything, whether it is wrong or not, in Downtown, then you will make the iProvo fiasco look like a walk in the park.

This is why I have been telling my readers, nearly since day one, to ask Mr. Curtis how he plans to pay for his plans and operations. If you cannot see that Mr. Curtis is fiscally irresponsible in terms of municipal financing, then I do not know what else will open your eyes. The City of Provo literally cannot afford a Mayor who believes that tax-payer money is a revenue source for risky investments that fit a personal agenda. Mr. Curtis states he doesn’t like studies, task forces, or ideas that come from group sessions. He wants to blaze his own trail here in Provo, regardless of the consequences, and you’re along for the ride whether you like it or not. Mr. Curtis, PROVO IS NOT YOUR PERSONAL BUSINESS!

The Bureaucratic Debacle

Recently Mr. Curtis has begun to openly attack Steve Clark’s tentative plan to implement a mentor in the process of starting and running a business in Provo. Mr. Curtis has stated that Mr. Clark’s plan will simply add more bureaucracy to a system already rife with unnecessary rules and regulations. It seems that both candidates believe that there needs to be some type of change with this system in order to make doing business in Provo easier, thereby attracting more businesses (and jobs) to our community. However, the manner in which the candidates seek to implement change is drastically different.

Mr. Curtis has made it abundantly clear that he hates bureaucracy. On his campaign website, Curtis states that he will “[reduce] the costs of doing business in Provo through streamlining and reducing bureaucracy…Government does best when it helps the entrepreneur and stays out of their way.” [1] When it comes to business development, Curtis wants government to be a silent observer and to interfere as little as possible. Curtis wants “less government intrusion and more economic development and growth,” but can he really have his cake and eat it, too? [1] The main problem with Curtis’ plan is that he will be, if elected Mayor, the head of Administrative services for the City of Provo, meaning he needs to ensure the system is providing services in an efficient and equitable manner. However, Curtis has already stated that he wants to reduce the bureaucracy of Provo and streamline business development, without giving a solid plan of how he is going to do this. The words “reducing bureaucracy” and “less government” usually equates to eliminating positions at City Hall. Yet eliminating positions does not reduce bureaucracy, and the number of employees is not directly correlated to the extent of bureaucracy within a municipality.

This is where Mr. Curtis is confused about what municipal government and bureaucracy actually is. Bureaucracy is simply an established order of hierarchies, rules, and regulations in order to delegate responsibilities and duties. If Mr. Curtis wants to reduce bureaucracy in Provo, then he will need to eliminate rules that are currently in place for potential business owners to open shop in Provo. In other words, Curtis’ plan is a clarion call for a complete overhaul of how business is done in Provo. This means authority outside of the office of Mayor; an effort that will need to full cooperation of the City Council in order to change, add, or eliminate current rules and regulations that are set in order to regulate business activity. As a result of changing the basic rules of starting and running a business in Provo, this would devolve down to restructuring individual City department rules, organization, and regulation in order to inform City employees of the complete overhaul of the system. Do you understand what all of these changes will mean to individual citizens and prospective business owners alike? More tax-payer funds spent; more time and resources utilized at the City level to train and reorganize entire teams and departments, including the potential loss of jobs in the process; and time losing potential business clients while we seek to reform a system which is not broken.

Steve Clark’s plan for improving the way businesses open shop in Provo is drastically different from Mr. Curtis’ plan. Where Mr. Curtis wants to tear down the current system and build it anew, Mr. Clark is advocating a map through the current process. Mr. Clark is seeking a mentor with whom potential business owners can communicate with in order to expedite business creation in Provo. This mentor would do the legwork in City Hall for the prospective owners, and inform them of forms, information, and fees they would need in order to complete the process. Potential business owners would no longer need to walk from department-to-department seeking assistance in creating a business because the mentor would literally walk them through the process. Mr. Clark linked this plan to the same tasks a personal banker engages in every day. When first entering a bank, a customer might know about basic services offered by the bank, but they do not know where to begin, what specific forms to fill out, or how much money they will need for services offered by the bank. This is where the banker plays a key role, because the banker understands the banking system better than the common person and can help an individual navigate through options and help him/her understand services offered. In essence, Mr. Clark’s plan for improving the business process at City Hall is to add customer service representatives who understand the process and rules set forth by the City and help potential business owners navigate through the requirements.

Looking back at the differences between these two plans, we can plainly see a vast difference in opinions between these two candidates. Mr. Curtis seems to believe that adding a customer service representative to the process will somehow add another level of bureaucracy to development here in Provo. When in reality, Steve Clark’s plan doesn’t rely on more government; his plan actually lowers it and makes government more accessible. Rather than a potential business owner talking to and filling out paperwork with multiple individuals from multiple departments, these individuals will have the option of talking with just one person in order to navigate, from start to finish, the process of starting a business.

The candidates have two very different plans which boil down the following:

John Curtis: Wants to completely reorganize the bureaucracy of doing business in Provo to make the process “easier” with “less intrusion.” He will do this by “streamlining and reducing bureaucracy,” which will require complete restructuring of department organization, operating procedures, and rules. This plan would need a majority vote of the City Council in order to come to fruition and may take years to implement successfully.

Steve Clark: Wants to add a customer service position (i.e. business mentor) that will assist potential business owners through the current system. This will require potential business owners to have a single contact at the City, thereby making the process both easier and less intrusive to the individual. Since there is no restructuring of government rules or organization, the City Council would not need to vote on approval of the system. The change could be implemented immediately since the representative would be navigating the current system.

Now, which plans sounds like additional bureaucracy to you? Guess which plan will end up costing you more in the end? In Curtis’ efforts to eliminate bureaucracy, he is attempting to make a mountain out of a molehill by completely changing processes he feels are frustrating and cumbersome. Perhaps he could enlighten the people of Provo why he feels the current system is in need of a complete overhaul, and what a new system would represent in order to balance the needs of a business and protection to neighborhoods? Mr. Curtis has stated that Mr. Clark’s plan is similar to what Ronald Reagan once said: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” Yet there is another quote that comes to mind from Ronald Reagan to explain Curtis’ plan: “Facts are stubborn things.” The FACT of the matter is, Mr. Curtis, that Steve Clark’s plan doesn’t add another level to bureaucracy, since this would simply be a customer service position that would be opt-in or opt-out for potential business owners. If someone felt they could navigate the system alone, they would not be forced to work through a representative; if they got lost through the process, the business mentor would be present to assist them to get back on track. It is your plan, Mr. Curtis, which fits the nine most terrifying words in the English language, because if you are Mayor of Provo and seek to change the system, you are literally telling potential business owners that you’re there to help (and you will be the HEAD of government). Ironic, isn’t it? Steve Clark’s plan is the easiest to implement, while your plan, Mr. Curtis, would call for a complete change of the current system to something you deem better. In fact, I have found a quote which sums up your plan perfectly, Mr. Curtis:

“The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity, but the one that removes awareness of other possibilities.” –Alan Bloom

[1] http://www.johncurtis.org/prosperity.html

Sensationalism at its worst: MS-13 in Provo?

For those of you who attended the Daily Herald mayoral debate earlier this week, I’m sure you had as good of a time as I did. Both of the candidates, in my opinion, did exceptionally well. Both had their hits and misses, but there is one aspect in Curtis’ material that I disagree with emphatically. The debate quickly touched upon the issue of gangs in our City, and Mr. Curtis was quick to start listing gangs who are currently present and active in our community. One of the gangs he rambled off with such ease was MS-13, a talking point which shows two facts about Mr. Curtis: he has his ‘facts’ mixed up about gang issues in Provo and he is trying to utilize fear in order to garner support for his campaign.

For those of you who heard Mr. Curtis talking about MS-13, you may find his information strangely familiar to a KSL news article written nearly two years ago. [1] But first, you may be wondering ‘what in the world is MS-13?’ Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, found its origins in southern California after refugees from a civil war in El Salvador ran to the United States for safety. Many of these young refugees quickly banded together in order to fight back attacks from other street gangs in the area, combining under the banner MS-13 which derives the name from La Mara (a notorious Salvadorian gang), Salvatruchas (peasant members of the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front), and the ‘13’ was added to honor the symbol of the Mexican Mafia. [2] This gang is notorious for funding operations through killing-for-hire and heavy drug trafficking. The methods used to contain this notorious gang in El Salvador are so encompassing that they have a special prison to house only members of this gang. If you want to know more about this gang and the specific details of the ‘how’ and ‘why’ behind their operations, I suggest you following the [2] link and read the article. In general, the website www.knowgangs.com is a wonderful resource to anyone wanting to know more about specific gangs.

Now back to the subject at hand. Mr. Curtis seems to believe that Provo is now home to members of this notorious El Salvador-based gang. My question for Mr. Curtis is what evidence does he have that the police do not have? The same article Mr. Curtis plagiarized most of his ‘facts’ from stated that “the MS-13 gang hasn’t flexed its muscles much here [Utah] yet, but it may be recruiting members as young as 8 years old” (emphasis added). [1] What Mr. Curtis doesn’t seem to realize is when MS-13 is present in a community, you will know it. MS-13 is not engaged in petty theft, but their entire organization is focused around “very violent, high-profile criminal activity.” [1] Why high-profile criminal activity, like murder-for-hire or killing witnesses to crimes? Because, like most gangs, they realize that the media will, like a moth to the flame, come with their cameras and newspapers to do the publicity for them. Yet the only problem here is that Mr. Curtis is acting like the media, trying to give credibility to a notorious street gang that has none of the common signs of activity in our community.

Mr. Curtis may try to focus on the ‘fact’ that there has been graffiti spotted that says MS-13. Yet, if you are trying to convince the people of Provo that an incidence of graffiti means a gang is present and active, you are literally standing on a house of cards. It is true that graffiti is one of the lowest forms of gang activity, but the only problem with graffiti is that it is difficult to verify whether the graffiti is truly from associated members of the gang, or whether copycats are to blame. The same article that Mr. Curtis used for his information about MS-13 stated that “one of the unknowns is whether local gangsters who claim membership in MS-13 are really connected to a national or international hierarchy.” [1] Police officers are commonly presented with the problem of dealing with “wannabe” gangsters who are actually not affiliated with gang operations, but just try to look the part because it is ‘cool’ or provides street credibility. Because of this, it is difficult for police officers to pin down gang membership numbers throughout the State of Utah. In other words, just because graffiti is present doesn’t mean that the gang is.

Mr. Curtis might try to say that MS-13 is present in other areas of Utah, so they are here, too. This argument also falls flat, because we cannot compare Provo with other cities. The KSL article states that police have tracked MS-13 members in Park City, West Valley, Tooele, and Salt Lake City, but they gave no reference to the Provo/Orem area. Also, this article also stated that “no major crimes have been attributed” to MS-13 in the entire state of Utah. [1] Also, the danger behind trying to link Provo with areas like West Valley City and Tooele is that every community is different and cannot be compared to each other when we are speaking about an issue like gangs. Since gangs are literally a social issue, we cannot compare our perception of gang activity to another city’s gang activity. The people who make up a community frame the problems and ideals of that community, so what might be considered a problem in Provo may be just a nuisance in West Valley City.

If you are truly concerned about gangs in our neighborhoods, then you really shouldn’t be looking to someone who is trying to gain political office for the ‘facts’ about gangs. Al Valdez, the leading researcher into gang activity in the United States, has talked about the danger of politicians grandstanding ‘gang problems’ to the public. The media is the medium for the public to gain information, and when a politician states that there is a widespread problem of gang activity, the media will either run the story without checking the sources or they will consult the police for further information. However, even if the media goes to the police for information, the stories they will run will never be 100% accurate because they never have all the information that police officials have access to. It is not the job of the media to make a story completely accurate; journalists just need the story to be good enough to sell papers and grab people’s attention. In either situation, the entire story is not presented because only the police can give an accurate representation of gang activity in a community because that is their job. Don’t look towards a politician, the media, or your grandma to get accurate information about gangs because only the police are prepared to address issues as complex as gang activity.

Mr. Curtis is trying to appear and act as the sole authority of gang issues in the City of Provo. By openly proclaiming ‘problems’ to which he has neither authority nor facts, he is causing irreversible damage to the psyche of the Provo citizen. Mr. Curtis claims that a hallmark of his campaign is the safety of our community by stating that “instead of pretending [gangs are not] out there we need to deal with gangs head on.” [3] Is your idea of tackling this issue “head on,” by sensationalizing the presence of MS-13, something that is not even an issue in our community? Are you so paranoid that you believe one of the most notorious and violent gangs in the United States has found a new home in Provo, Utah, because of an article written nearly two years ago? Is your mind so diluted that when a Provo citizen stated to you, in confidence, “if you take away my piece of mind, I have nothing,” that you then parade around telling us that the West Side of Provo is a breeding ground for gang activity and the South Towne Center is filled with gang members? [3] How are your grandstanding, sensationalist comments about gangs helping the people of Provo feel safe? Unsubstantiated ‘facts’ about gangs are just as dangerous as true gang activity, Mr. Curtis, and to paraphrase upon the movie Field of Dreams: if you continue to build a pretense of MS-13 in our community, they will come.


[1] http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=2495499

[2] http://www.knowgangs.com/gang_resources/profiles/ms13/

[3] http://www.heraldextra.com/app/elections09/candidates/provo/mayor/

Dramatic Shift to the Right or Left?

I have come across more pieces of useful information (or negative smearing, depending upon your interpretation of pesky facts) that I would like to share with the people of Provo. As I've stated previously, Mr. Curtis wants the fact that he was a Democrat to go away; too many questions are being asked about the 'why' behind his decision to do so, and since there isn't an easy answer people are starting to question the man's integrity.

Since Provo is the Seat of Utah County, and has been informally dubbed the bastion of conservatism, to be called a Democrat might be likened to a naughty four-letter word. Some might say "who cares about party affiliation," and, to a point, I agree completely. Really, if you're going to be a Republican, stand up for what you believe in. If you are going to be a Democrat you should “stand up and fight…be a Democrat and fight for what you think is right in Utah County.” [1] This previous quote was given by Nancy Jane Woodside, previous Chairwoman of the Utah County Democratic Party. Also interesting about this individual is that Mr. John Curtis served as her Vice Chairman, and at the same speech where she proclaimed this rally call to Democratic values, she also uttered these words:

“You don’t give anything up to those crazies in the Republican party,” she said to applause. “You can stand up to them. We will stand up to them together.” (emphasis added) [1]

“Those crazies in the Republican party.” If this isn’t the pinnacle of negative campaigning, then someone please awaken me from this nightmare. Not only was Mr. Curtis present when these words were uttered, but he served as the Vice Chairman of the leadership committee to stand up to “crazies in the Republican party.” I would like for Mr. Curtis to explain the circumstances behind this situation for himself, in his words, why he aligned himself with a party who thought that the dominant party was rife with “crazies.” Maybe Mr. Curtis will try to tell you that changes to the 2000 Utah County Democratic platform were in “close harmony” with his “core values.” [2] Or maybe he will try to tell you that he was actually a victim of circumstances, that he was actually in “a dramatic attempt to align the Utah County Democratic Party with Utah County values.” [3] Or maybe he will try to tell you that he was simply trying “to give Utah County voters more choices at the ballot box” by putting a (D) instead of a (R) at the end of his name. [3] Whatever his excuse may be, it becomes painfully evident that Mr. Curtis has orchestrated an intricate web of lies and half-truths to deceive the people of Provo about his political background.

By why give such an elaborate story to explain something that should be straightforward and simple to understand? Why not simply state “I ran as a Democrat, I believed in the values, so get off my back”? That because Mr. Curtis, more than anyone else in this race, understands the consequences of running as a Democrat in Utah County. In his own words, Mr. Curtis stated that he lost a political race while running as a Democrat because “there is clearly a confidence level in voting for Republicans…the ‘D’ and the ‘R’ sets up stereotypes in a lot of people’s minds, stereotypes that don’t reflect who I am.” [4]

In response to this, I have two very simple questions, Mr. Curtis: What are these stereotypes you are speaking of, and who are you? Firstly, you speak of stereotypes, and I’m guessing that you are referring to the stereotype that people in Utah view Democrats as the fulcrum of all that is evil in society. Well, the interesting aspect surrounding stereotypes is that they are a two-way street, just like when you stated the following:

“A vote for George W. Bush was a vote against me,” said Curtis. “It’s disheartening to go through what we went through for the campaign and know that we were dead before we even started.” [4]

So, as you bemoaned that ‘stereotypes’ lost you the election (it could never be something as simple as issues or stance, right?), you also delve into the stereotype that any individual who voted for President Bush did not vote for you. If you do not win the mayoral race, are you going to blame “smear campaigning” or “negativity” surrounding your campaign, or will you realize that the issues simply are not stacking up in your favor?

You see, Mr. Curtis, I am not the only person who is questioning your intentions. There are plenty of people out there who are asking ‘who is John Curtis…really?’ When you find yourself surrounded by a mostly conservative audience or being questioned by a conservative newspaper, you gladly state that your “values have never changed” and that you have “been a Republican [your] whole life.” [3] However, if you are in the presence of a more liberal-leaning crowd, you are not afraid to say that you “believe one-party dominance” is “at the heart of the problem” here in Utah; that you are “not afraid to stray form [sic] the stereotypes of the past.” [5] The dualities within your nature are like a tailspin, Mr. Curtis. You bemoan that stereotypes ruined your chances at political office as a Democrat, yet you stated that you ran as a Democrat because you were not afraid to stray from those stereotypes that supposedly doomed you. In fact, after taking Nancy Jane Woodside’s position as Chairman of the Utah County Democrats when she decided to run for public office against a Republican, you said Republicans didn’t “need any more advantage than they already have” when addressing Woodside’s concern that Republicans were always listed first on the ballot. [6]

I believe Mr. Curtis is trying to cross the finish line with a very intricate lie that he has been carrying throughout the entire campaign. Up until recently, Mr. Curtis issued a challenge on his website that he would personally go “toe-to-toe” with any individual who wanted to question his conservative stances; that is until this challenge was taken away. Why erase this off your website, Mr. Curtis? Are the demons of your political past coming to fruition? Are people starting to question your reasoning behind switching parties? Are your past comments betraying your current positions? There really isn’t an easy answer, because Mr. Curtis has spun himself into a web of lies and half-truths that only he can understand which makes matters difficult for the people of Provo. When we want to know what Mr. Curtis truly believes, we can never know because his values are always changing. Even if he stands by his ‘values,’ how are we not to know that this isn’t an artificial attempt to appear conservative so he does not lose another race due to ‘stereotypes’?

People of Provo, you should never vote based on political affiliation alone. You should always look towards the candidate’s issues and platform, and then make a calculated decision on what you believe is best for the City as a whole. Yet when you look towards Mr. Curtis and want a straightforward answer, you really can’t get the answer you’re looking for. The outright lies that have come from his own mouth about his political background is enough to nullify any integrity left within his campaign, all while he accuses his opponents of operating a “whisper campaign” which is spreading “shallow accusations…half truths and rumors.” [7] I hate to break the news to you, Mr. Curtis, but the only person spreading half truths about your background is staring right back at you in the mirror.


[1] http://www.deseretnews.com/article/843209/

[2] http://www.ourcampaigns.com/cgi-bin/r.cgi/CandidateDetail.html?&CandidateID=13693

[3] http://www.deseretnews.com/article/650219973/2-vie-for-Provo-House-seat.html

[4] http://www.deseretnews.com/article/850009/?pg=1

[5] http://web.archive.org/web/20010803024809/www.johncurtis.org/q&a.shtml

[6] http://www.deseretnews.com/article/908464/

[7] http://www.johncurtis.org/rumors.html

Worth a Thousand Words?

This morning in the Daily Herald, both John Curtis and Steve Clark were able to outline the specifics of their campaigns before a very important debate this evening at the Provo Library. [1] This is a wonderful summary of both candidates, and I suggest that each citizen of Provo take the time to read this article before voting (I have provided a link at the bottom of the page).

There is, however, a section of interest under John Curtis' section in the Daily Herald article (The Campaign) that has tied into a number of posts on this blog and the newly published website, www.followthemoneyprovo.com. Mr. Curtis is expressing his dissatisfaction that there is so much "negativity" in the current campaign for Mayor, and I believe his definition of negativity is entertaining. He states the following:

"Curtis is willing to accept potshots because they're part of politics, he said. One of the potshots -- that he was a Democrat for awhile -- is silly because it's not hurting him. 'Other than those detractors, nobody cares,' he said. He's also being held to a different standard, he said. His camp is blamed for all the negative information that comes out about his opponent and the political action committee attacking Councilwoman Cindy Richards. People opposed to his candidacy continue to send negative e-mails about him, he said, including one circulating a photo from his primary election night party at Brick Oven pizza restaurant that featured some of the people behind the anti-Richards PAC, stopcindy.com. 'It's all ridiculous, Curtis said. 'Other than a Web site that says stop John, there's as much negativity going on about my campaign as any other campaign in the city,' he said."

Firstly, I want to focus on this picture Mr. Curtis is talking about, and I have provided a modified copy of this picture below:


This picture is finding its way around the Internet with considerable speed, but just because Mr. Curtis wants to shoo it away as an item of no consequence should raise red flags in the mind of any person who knows anything about politics. When a politician attempts to directly confront an issue, which supposedly has neither weight nor bearing on their campaign, and dismiss it entirely as "smear", why would you use energy to even talk about the issue? The simple answer is that this picture is more than what Curtis would like to call a smear campaign, but is a font-seat into his closest support network.

In the purple box we have the candidate himself, Mr. John Curtis. Enough said.

In the red box we can see Mr. Steve Turley, City Wide District II. Whether you love or hate Steve Turley is really not a concern of mine, but I find his presence at this meeting more than a coincidence. Mr. Curtis, in the Daily Herald campaign article, tried to lessen the ties between his campaign and Mr. Turley by saying the following: [1]

"Curtis also said he has met individually with all the members of the Provo Municipal Council, including Cindy Clark, Steve Clark's wife, and Steve Turley, with whom he is frequently associated. 'Cindy Clark has been a bigger part of shaping his campaign than Turley,' he said."

Now Mr. Curtis might consider this to be 'negativity,' but I like to call it asking the hard questions. If Cindy Clark is, indeed, "a bigger part of shaping" of your campaign than Steve Turley is, then why isn't she in this photo or any photo at one of your campaign events? Despite the fact that she is the wife of your opponent, how can you say Cindy Clark is helping to shape your campaign? What evidence are you placing in the public forum to show that Mrs. Clark is an inspiration to your campaign? The answer: nothing. This was not even a good attempt to cover up the fact that this picture (which you may consider negative, but others consider evidence) you have surrounded yourself by your closest supporters.

In the green box is Mr. Taylor Oldroyd, an individual I have talked about on this blog previously. [2] Mr. Oldroyd is a master of political games, including the stopcindy.com website, while Mr. Curtis upholds a righteous standard that he does not believe in playing political games, but wants to focus on the issues. Once again, this is a most interesting connection within the Curtis campaign. I am reminded of a song which sums up this relationship very well, and strangely enough it comes from the group Metallica, Sad but True:

You, You’re my mask

You’re my cover, my shelter

You, You’re my mask

You’re the one who’s blamed

Do, Do my work

Do my dirty work, scapegoat

Do, Do my deeds

For you’re the one who’s shamed

Mr. Curtis may not be the one who is orchestrating negative campaigning, but those who support him do so unabashedly in the public forum. As a result, Mr. Curtis is acting as a very elaborate puppet master, trying to distance himself from a campaign of negativity not seen in this City for many years while he is holding the strings to the major players. Don't worry, Mr. Curtis, Mr. Oldroyd is shaming his professionalism and dirtying his hands in a drastic attempt to get you into office as Mayor.

And finally, in the blue box we have Sterling Beck, candidate for City Council District 5 and directly supported by the Utah County Association of Realtors and the stopcindy.com campaign. In other words, one of Beck's largest supporters is Mr. Taylor Oldroyd. I really don't know what is more convenient, that a picture was taken with all of these players in the same room for the same event, or that Mr. Beck is conveniently situated in the shadow of his biggest supporter and PAC? This is not negativity, Mr. Curtis, this is the plain truth. What I have failed to hear from you are reasons, despite your attempts to shoo this picture away as a product of smear campaigning. Pictures tell a thousand words, and this picture is definitely talking.

From Mr. Curtis' earlier comments at the beginning of this blog, I also find another quote to be quite interesting. Mr. Curtis believes that he is being held to "a different standard" when compared to his opponent, Steve Clark. If I may, let me tell you a reason why people are looking towards your camp once negative information surfaces about your opponent. The main reason is found at your right hand, and that is Brian Chapman, your campaign manager. Anyone who knows anything about BCR Political, with whom Mr. Chapman is associated with, knows that dirty politics follow close behind. Also, maybe you have forgotten that this is a political race, and that once negative comments surface the first person to be blamed is the opposite camp. This is what most people would deem common sense, but in your book it is obviously an elaborate political conspiracy against your 'change' for Provo.

Lastly, I thoroughly enjoy the attempts of Mr. Curtis to shoo away his political past. First he attempts to embrace the fact that he ran as a Democrat in Utah, then at other times he tries to nullify the issue as negativity. Previously in this blog, I have written about why Mr. Curtis is concerned about this issue, and how he is not giving all the facts behind his decision to run as a Democrat then a Republican in the State of Utah. [3] Mr. Curtis believes the issue of him being a Democrat is "not hurting him," and that those who have listened to his political past are nothing but "detractors." (in other words, Mr. Curtis believes those people never added any value to his campaign to begin with). Yet there is more behind this story than what Mr. Curtis is telling the public, and he is openly lying to the people about the reasons behind why he ran as a Democrat. He focuses upon his "core values" never changing from a Republican platform, but his old campaign website as a Democrat says differently. [4]

Mr. Curtis, this is not "negative campaigning" or "smearing," this is what we like to call the hard facts. These are the issues you want to go away, but they will not. It is time to start telling the whole truth, rather than your interpretation of the truth.


[1] http://www.heraldextra.com/article_f9b9d59d-e19b-59e9-bca9-8efabfe09f60.html

[2] http://whoisjohncurtis.blogspot.com/2009/10/guilty-by-association.html

[3] http://whoisjohncurtis.blogspot.com/2009/09/tale-of-two-curtises.html

[4] http://www.ourcampaigns.com/cgi-bin/r.cgi/CandidateDetail.html?&CandidateID=13693

Follow the Money, Provo!

Since my initial post about John Curtis' association with Taylor Oldroyd, and the special interested associated with this partnership, I have run across a website which clearly outlines what I was talking about. I would highly suggest that every Provo citizen also visit the following website:

www.followthemoneyprovo.com

This website is not only about Oldroyd's assocation with John Curtis' campaign, but how Oldroyd and the Realtors Association are literally financing seats on the City Council and Mayor's Office. My hat goes off to the creator of this website and I hope more people will find out about this site soon before PACs buy up important political seats in our community.

Is Half-a-Heart Enough for Provo?

One aspect I find very interesting about this mayoral race is not only the fact that we have two very respected individuals running for office, but also that these two men come from very diverse backgrounds. Steve Clark is a Representative for the State of Utah, businessman, and a 'born and raised' Provo citizen. John Curtis has a diverse political background, is also a businessman, and has spent many years of his life within our community. These two candidates may differ in issues, but in background they show a hint of similarities. Some may argue that Clark's experience is greater than Curtis', or that Curtis' business is greater than Clark's; I'm not here to take a measure of experience, but what I do care about in a leader is heart. There is a quote that I do enjoy, which I originally heard from Robert Denhardt (which he borrowed from Lance Secretan), author of the book The Dance of Leadership [1], which brings an interesting perspective into the realm of leadership:

"Leadership is not so much about technique and methods as it is about opening the heart. Leadership is about inspiration — of oneself and of others. Great leadership is about human experiences, not processes. Leadership is not a formula or a program, it is a human activity that comes from the heart and considers the hearts of others. It is an attitude, not a routine."

I absolutely love this quote, and I think every inspired word fits beautifully into every good leader any individual has come across. You cannot magically pick up a book about leadership, read the contents, and in the morning be an amazing leader. To be a true leader takes "human experiences" and activities which not only come from the heart of the leader, but also activities which "consider the hearts of others." Both Steve Clark and John Curtis have heart; they both have issues they believe strongly in; both have lifelong experiences, trials, heartaches, and triumphs to bring into the Mayor's Office; and both have extended their hands to the people of Provo to be a leader. In the context of this quote, these candidates need to extend their whole heart, or their entire being, to the people of Provo if they are going to make positive change. It is with this fact where I find myself troubled.

On John Curtis' campaign blog, under the 'Rumors' section, Mr. Curtis talks about his colorful political past as he experimented between parties. There have been many explanations in the public of why he chose to run in two parties for two different political offices, but one explanation he gave troubled me. To be honest, I really do not care what political party you are affiliated with or what office you are running for, just as long as you do so with gusto and confidence in your abilities to lead. In this section, Mr. Curtis talks about how he unsuccessfully ran as a Democrat for public office, but was extended the opportunity to serve as Chairman of the Utah County Democratic Party. Obviously individuals within the Utah Democrats saw potential in Mr. Curtis to trust him with such a high position of leadership, and it is for this reason why I find the following comment so troublesome:

"At the end of the campaign, the Utah county Democrat Party asked me to be their leader. I spent the next few months half heartedly continuing to push my platform of conservatism but ultimately realized that, although I continue to believe in the need for a viable two-party system, I have always been a Republican at heart and I would never be able to fully accomplish my conservative goals within any other Party." (emphasis added) [2]

I don't understand, Mr. Curtis. Earlier in this same exact post you plainly state you ran as a Democrat because you saw the opportunity to fulfill two goals you felt passionate about: "1) to bring the County Democrats back toward a more reasonable position; and 2) to challenge a Republican establishment which I felt had become lazy on true conservative issues." I believe this takes true heart, to run as a Democrat to challenge the "Republican establishment" and to bring Democrats in Utah "back toward a more reasonable position." Yet when you were extended the ideal opportunity to do exactly this as Chairman of the Utah County Democrats, you only "half heartedly" continued to push conservatism, even though you had "always been a Republican at heart."

I have what may be a complex question, possibly more complex than questions about your political history, Mr. Curtis: what exactly does your heart believe in? I appreciate the candor in your statements, but I must admit this appears more as a confession than a mission statement. You believed in something so great that it drove you to extreme measures (as I would think that any 'true conservative' would never run in the ranks of the Democratic Party, simply due to the extreme conflict of interest to political platforms), yet you openly admit that these efforts were simply performed with only half your heart invested into the effort.

This is a most strange and disconcerted statement, Mr. Curtis. You have been very open in public meetings and spread your message all around Provo; truly, you have attempted to show every individual that you want to be mayor with all your heart. Yet I must ask, do you really want to be the mayor of Provo with your whole heart? What if the mayor's responsibilities are not what you came to expect, and you find yourself in another situation similar to being a Chairman for the Utah County Democrats? Will you invest only half your heart into the City of Provo like you did with the Utah County Democrats?

And to the people of Provo, I ask you do you want a leader who has openly admitted that they only gave an effort worthy of half a heart in a key leadership responsibility? In the professional world, oftentimes you are handed responsibilities and tasks that you simply do not like. However, the true professional will hoist these responsibilities upon their shoulders and carry them proudly as if the cause was one they would die for. A leader never picks and chooses what responsibilities they will invest their energy; to a real leader, every negative moment or troublesome issue is an opportunity for true leadership of the heart to shine. Where the social capital of one's life is expelled in a radiant, glorious manner to transform the once negative aspects of a task into a benefit to all those around. To be rudimentary: when life gives you lemons, make lemonade.

Mr. Curtis, I honestly believe you cannot be a true leader. You have the qualities of leadership, as is shown in your business experience and the beautiful family you have raised hand-in-hand with your wife. However, you do not have the heart to lead Provo into a brighter, better tomorrow. I honestly believe you do not have the confidence in Provo or her people to truly harness the true leadership of heart; you may trust the heart of Provo's people, but I believe it is fair to say you do not understand the capacity or depth of your own heart.


[1] http://www.amazon.com/Dance-Leadership-Leading-Business-Government/dp/076561734X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255930294&sr=1-1

[2] http://www.johncurtis.org/rumors.html

Amplitudo Epitome

I have noticed a new section to John Curtis’ website that adds a type of grand summary to what he believes he will add to Provo as mayor.[1] John has been quite vocal to both his supporters and detractors to “look deeper” into everything from the issues facing Provo to even his personal life and character. This section, I believe, is a testament to that rally call, but in true political style he only gives bullet points with no substance whatsoever. I, for one, am up for a nice challenge, and since a majority of individuals will creep along with the bandwagon and completely ignore the issues, I guess I will be fighting the status quo for the masses.

Mr. Curtis has broken down his expectations into three categories. Anyone familiar with Curtis’ campaign slogan might have a slight inkling of what these three areas may be: Safety, Prosperity, and Unity. Despite my sheer hatred of over-arching campaign slogans which carry more rhetoric than substance, I will entertain the fact that Mr. Curtis is sharing what he believes the people of Provo can expect from him if he is elected on November 3, 2009. Each of these issues has a number of points, but in the interest of time (and my sanity) I will only cover those issues that have raised my eyebrows. Let us begin…

Safety:
“Put citizens’ safety first.” This is a most interesting proposition, Mr. Curtis. I didn’t realize it was the policy of Provo City to place the safety of their citizens as a second-rate priority. Besides this, I would challenge Mr. Curtis to tell the citizenry of Provo how he has come to believe that safety is not a first-class priority here in the City. If I were a member of the Police/Fire Department, I would take great offense at this statement. The men and women who so bravely serve our City put every ounce of energy into their labors; they put their lives on the line, and those are first-class, first-rate lives, Mr. Curtis. I could not feel safer knowing the stellar individuals we have overseeing the operations and safety of our City. I do not understand, even for a minute, how you can believe citizen safety is not a first-rate priority of our City.

“Give police officers and firefighters the proper tools to protect our homes and families.” As I have attended numerous events where Mr. Curtis has spoken, the words ‘budget situation’ often pass his lips. Now, here is an interesting piece of political garbage that Mr. Curtis is trying to sell to the people of Provo under the banner of a catchy campaign slogan. I, for one, am all for our Police and Fire Departments having the best equipment possible, because if my life is in danger I want the best equipped and best trained individuals to respond. In fact, I am willing to say that I would pay higher taxes to ensure that the right equipment is provided. However, as Mr. Curtis continually states that our Fire and Police personnel apparently are not properly geared or trained, he has failed to give a method of how these improvements will be funded. Knowing a little about municipal financing, I know that property taxes are the surest way of increasing the General Operating Fund of a city. For what Mr. Curtis is talking about, he would need to substantially raise property taxes in order to increase the budgets of the two most well-fed departments in the City. So, why doesn’t he talk about the ‘how’ behind his plan? The answer is simple: talking about raising taxes, especially property taxes, during a campaign is sure to be the proverbial iceberg to even the mightiest Titanic.

“Not tolerate gangs in our city.” Once again, I did not realize it was City policy to tolerate gang actions. For anyone who has been to a campaign event or debate with Mr. Curtis, the issue of gang activity in Provo is always one he extols immediately. In fact, Mr. Curtis is even so bold to say that Provo has a ‘gang problem.’ I, for one, do not deny that gangs are present in our community, but the manner in which Mr. Curtis talks about gangs would make one think that our community is in dire straits. Why would he do this? The simple answer is because fear motivates better than the noblest cause. Mr. Curtis is, for lack of better words, a sensationalist. He loves to fan small fires into raging infernos, especially when it comes to the issue of gang activity. Any wise public leader would realize that you would never publicize in public forums a ‘gang problem,’ because you are then giving gang members validity for their actions, thereby increasing their ability to recruit. But this is exactly what Mr. Curtis wants: ask any member of a previous school board meeting where Mr. Curtis smiled from ear-to-ear when someone stated that there was a ‘gang problem’ in Provo. If Mr. Curtis truly did not want to tolerate gangs, he would not validate them in the public sector, keep secret lists of gang members, and tell of drug deals wherein no police officer has record. In the sickest way, Mr. Curtis utilizes the ill world of gang activity to bolster support for his campaign through fear. This, by far, is the cruelest and sickening political game he is playing.

“Make fighting graffiti and other nuisances a priority.” I’m afraid you missed the 10 o’clock train on this story, Mr. Curtis. Once again, you are attempting to discredit the amazing work of our Police and legal departments within the City. Maybe if Mr. Curtis would understand the organizations hard at-work to combat graffiti in our community, namely Teens Against Graffiti and the 4th District Juvenile Court, he would realize that graffiti abatement efforts are extremely successful. The Police Department realizes the importance of fighting graffiti, and the Daily Herald article laid it out quite well. I suggest you read it carefully. [2]

Prosperity:
“Build a strong financial foundation/make budgets fiscally sound and we will live within our means.” This shows Mr. Curtis is still thinking with his businessman hat on. I really do not believe Mr. Curtis has yet to understand how municipal government operations are funded. We are talking about the dreaded ‘T’ word: taxes. If Mr. Curtis desires to build a “strong financial foundation,” then he is going to have a difficult decision ahead of him. You heard it here first, ladies and gentlemen, for Mr. Curtis will need to choose between two very difficult choices: 1) Raise property taxes in order to bring the General Fund back to operational levels, or 2) cut a number of city services, and possibly jobs, in order to bring the budget back into a healthy balance. I challenge every citizen of Provo to look at the City budget and how much property tax makes up of our total revenue sources when compared to other revenue sources. Unless Mr. Curtis is willing to raise taxes or cut services/jobs, this expectation is nothing but a pretense.

“Streamline city services to reduce the cost of doing business in Provo.” Let me tell you what this is codeword for: reducing city bureaucracy. If you haven’t noticed, Mr. Curtis absolutely despises the processes of municipal government, and for good reason. His business, Action Target, has been at the center of many debates in the hallways of City Hall. Everything from fire code violations, angry neighbors, to operating a firing range without proper clearance from the Police Chief, the ‘cost’ to Mr. Curtis was a bad reputation. If you want the facts, you can obtain any public record by simply filling out a GRAMA form at the City Recorder’s Office, placing “Action Target code violations” in the subject line. What Mr. Curtis fails to realize is that the bureaucracy of government is a necessary evil. A bureaucracy is simply a body of non-elected government officials who are characterized by specialization of functions, coupled with adherence to a fixed set of rules and hierarchy of authority. [3] We are talking about the support staff in all administrative departments who will be assisting the Mayor’s Office. So, in order to ‘streamline’ the bureaucracy of Provo, are we going to be cutting positions so we can put more money towards individuals who want to run businesses here? Or is this simply a crusade against the City for making Mr. Curtis adhere to the big, bad bureaucratic structure which is meant to enforce equality and justice in the municipal setting? The answer is we don’t know his plan, because he doesn’t have one, nor will he cough one up. This is, once again, a fluffy example of campaign rhetoric that has no substance because it has no backbone.

Unity:
“Bring teamwork and involvement to city issues.” Three words: WHERE’S THE BEEF? Honestly, does Mr. Curtis believe he is a political savior to the Provo Politics issue? That by simply gracing the Mayor’s Office and Council Chambers with his divine presence that all politicians and staff alike with suddenly seek to work together as a team and be involved in their work? If you have been sucked into this shallow, meaningless rhetoric, then you need to get a breath of fresh air. No single individual can make a team work together. No single individual can motivate a person to become involved in an issue, project, or duty. Only the individual can make a conscious decision to take initiative in his/her life, to work with others to make an impact on the environment around them. The only other way this can be done is through force, and then it is not teamwork or involvement, it is slavery.

“Partner with BYU to find win-win solutions.” In the distance I hear a piercing whisper saying ‘church and state.’ Maybe Mr. Curtis does not realize that BYU is very reluctant to delve into any public debates or decisions with the City of Provo because they are a private religious institution, who happens to have an ecclesiastical majority in the community. There is an official, unwritten policy at BYU administration which states, in short, not to become involved in civic matters. Why? If BYU leadership meets with City officials, the press has the right to attend the meeting. It is difficult to make a ‘win-win’ solution when you have the media breathing down the necks of Church officials and City officials, alike, waiting for the next big story to plaster on the front-page. The only person who can make a relationship work between BYU and the City of Provo is BYU. The City cannot force BYU to cooperate, nor can they change their desired path or plans. They are the largest employer and greatest consumer of utilities, thereby making them the greatest tax-payer base for the City. In short, when BYU says ‘jump,’ Provo City says ‘how high?’

“Find common ground to bridge that which divides us.” Wow, I didn’t realize we lived in a West/East Germany! This is political rhetoric at its worst. I believe this is right up near President Obama’s ‘hope’ and ‘change’ rants during his campaign, which is equating to absolutely nothing in his presidency. Can you guess what my theory is regarding an expectation like this from Mr. Curtis as mayor? Absolutely nothing will happen, because how can you define an issue like this? It is literally impossible, and Mr. Curtis knows this. Forget political games, this is the worst type of political strategy: deception.

People of Provo, you need to take Mr. Curtis’ words to action and look deeper into who he is. This individual is nothing but a catch phrase, a campaign slogan of wishful thoughts and ambitions. Ask him the hard questions; ask him to explain his positions and his beliefs; ask him to see evidence when he boldly states there is a ‘gang problem’ in our community; ask him how he will fund his ambitious plans for the Police and Fire Department; and most importantly of all, ask John Curtis why he feels we can’t be trusted to hear his real, concrete plan for Provo’s future. Stop giving us campaign slogans, Mr. Curtis, and start giving us the real plan.

[1] http://www.johncurtis.org/expect.html

[2] http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/article_cd52032a-1dc2-5117-af08-ac10c587d8c3.html

[3] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bureaucracy