Click this link to optimize Open City Hall for screen readers Skip to Content
Open City Hall
Open Town Hall

Subscribe to Registered Statements From Forum Participants

Info Hide

Get registered statements in your RSS reader or emailed to you as a daily digest.

A statement is registered if it is claimed, verified and civil:

  1. It is claimed if its author has claimed the statement by signing in before or shortly after submitting the statement.
  2. It is verified if it is claimed and its author has provided their street address in their registration and verified their email address by clicking the verification link emailed by Open Town Hall.
  3. It is civil if it is verified and it meets the guidelines for civility.

If any of these conditions are not met, then the statement is unregistered.

Statements are emailed at most once per day (in the morning).

Subscribe

Manage your subscription in your RSS feed reader

Check out some recent Registered Statements from forum participants

Justin McMurdie inside City Boundary October 18, 2020, 3:37 PM

Recently an art project called to my attention the monument in Pioneer park for the “Provo Indian War” needs an update.

According to Wikipedia and the sources: the “Provo Indian War” was a massacre not a war. I think it’s valuable to consider the message were collectively sending by having a monument to an action that by current standards is unacceptable.

As residents of this city we should send a message consistent with “Welcome Home” and update the monument to reflect reality.

We are not responsible for the actions of our ancestors, and we should acknowledge the bias inherent in the monument by updating it to correct a skewed telling of history.

I love Provo’s welcoming nature and I believe acknowledging our complicated history will help us collectively be more welcoming and speak volumes about our values, to build an inclusive, welcoming society than can continue to win awards for being a great place to live.

Name not shown inside City Boundary October 6, 2020, 3:40 PM

It is an interesting phenomena, but have you noticed that when a city grows too quickly in its success and progress that less desirable neighborhoods, homelessness, drugs, etc. also tend to increase rapidly, more quickly than officials recognize and can act on before it becomes difficult to control. Too much of the Wasatch Front, Provo included, has fallen into this progress trap. More interested in building the economy quickly than making it a long-term sustainable and desirable place for families and the stability that comes with strong family-centered communities. Yes, Provo has made token gestures towards families, but overall the last several years the shift is moving more towards economy and business over family.

The Provo City Council needs to seriously review all of the ordinances it has passed over the last several years and re-evaluate whether the ordinance was to promote business and economic impact (including increasing tax revenue) or was it to actually benefit residents and citizens.

There are fine lines between economy and family benefits, but too often decisions are made without seriously considering the concerns of the citizens. Provo City officials tend to think they know what is better (or at least believe developers and commercial interests more) than the residents do. Just as Washington DC really has no right to dictate what Utah should do, one part of Provo should not dictate what the other side can or cannot do. I live in what used to be a somewhat rural part of the city. The last few years has seen increasing encroachment of economy-building decisions being forced on the residents of the area. The majority of the area residents are against these, but city officials seem more interested in building more housing, attracting more business, and overall increasing tax revenue than what residents want.

City officials listen more to developers and commercial interests than residents. They are starry-eyed with "progress", business, and economic accolades than actually continuing to build a strong family-centric city. They become more concerned with being seen as "progressive" and liberal-oriented/friendly than standing for values that make families and communities stronger. If this was not the case, why is it "protesters" and rioters seem to believe that Provo is accepting of unconstitutional expressions? Why is it bonds and increased taxes are even considered in a deep economic downturn unless officials are more money-focused than citizen-focused? Why is it ordinances are proposed and passed that limit or restrict what people can or cannot do, such as what they can park on the street or even on their own property?

It is almost a guarantee that if something will increase taxes, attract more business, or is viewed as helping the city's economic growth it will have a higher value to the city council than any concerns residents express.

Which makes me wonder why I spend time writing here when comments are unlikely to be read by those who make decisions, and, even if they are read, the decision maker has likely already made up his/her mind and has labeled someone like me as being against progress and improvement.

Name not shown inside Fort Utah October 6, 2020, 3:13 PM

Provo used to be an awesome place to live. The last few years I've seen and experienced increasing government overreach. Any entity with taxing authority or ordinance control is overreaching into our wallets, lives, and property. The majority of those in government--including our own Provo City council--are more concerned with "progress," generating more tax revenue, and making commercial entities and developers happy.

Most government officials forget they work for and represent the people, not their own interests. Not only do we pay "rent" in the form of property taxes to the city, school district, county and others who collect and impose taxes on what is supposed to be our land for our use, but there is increasing overreach in telling residents what they can and cannot do with their property. As long as something on the property does not pose an undue hazard to those off the property, it should not matter what a resident parks on their own property. Those concerned with this should move to an actual HOA rather than trying to make all of Provo a government enforced HOA.

I know someone who was forced by Provo to do something with their undeveloped property or they would be heavily fined. He told us of someone whose property was annexed into the city--no say on the property owner's part--and then forced to comply with Provo ordinances or get jailed and fined. Really?! Is this what Provo is becoming? Are we (read "anyone in a government official role") really mandating what residents can or cannot do? Property mandates in the form non-grandfathered-clause ordinance?

Not to mention the poorly conceived, planned, and implemented construction projects--most of which have been heavily opposed by residents--that have been forced on us, often in the name of progress, brining in new business, etc. And I won't even go into the city's heavy-handed school district....

Provo used to be a great place to live. Thankfully my neighborhood is still great, but we're feeling the impacts of non-resident-centered decision making. I like where I live, it's great for my family and for my work. We have lived in the same house for nearly 12 years. But, discussions about moving out of Provo have been increasing the last few years.

What happens when the control Provo City is exerting over its residents increases to the point that those who can afford to have boats, travel trailers, etc. decide to start moving away from the city, into more citizen-appreciative locales? It won't happen at once, or even with a short time of a few years, but if Provo City government doesn't shift its focus it will start seeing more of its valuable residents deciding to leave and the quality of life in Provo will begin to deteriorate quickly.

Kyle Rizzo inside Lakeview North October 2, 2020, 9:30 PM

This is over reaching of the goverment and just causes more work load for enforcing. As long as it's not a safety concern, meaning the trailers of any types aren't a hazord to others this could include unmaintained trailers that are rusty or falling apart. There shouldn't be any enforcement. The examples show utility trailers that look well maintained and parked as reasonable as possible. This feels more like an HOA task as it would be debatably an eye sore mainly for some of them but they are still well maintained. Another concern is adding utilty trailer to the list puts small business owners such as contractors, plubmers, electricions and other tradesmen in a difficult position. That would require they move the trailers around constantly or require spending money to conform to the new rules by parking them remotely or renovating their homes. A lot of provos homes are of the type and style that there isn't space for trailers not in the driveway and front area.

Jared Curtis inside Rivergrove October 2, 2020, 1:43 PM

Regarding the BLM protestors that were blocking traffic the day of the shooting in Down Town, why were the protestors allowed to block traffic. In the joint interview with the Chief of Police and the Mayor and from released statements there was no stand down order from the Mayor. That point is emphasized repeatedly but there is no reason given for why they were allowed to block traffic. Was it a decision of the officers in the area or Is stopping people from blocking traffic no longer being enforced in Provo?

Danny Martinez inside Provo Bay October 2, 2020, 8:49 AM

Just as this pandemic has hit its peak I hope you're changing parking criteria not allowing people who are now leaving their homes and enjoying the outdoors with their travel trailers their boats whatever they have to go see nature I think that people need their space at the moment and more important things should be taken care of than just parking. Driving around Provo has been hard enough with all the construction but the speeding is something that needs to be taken care of. I walk around Southwest Provo and see so many people speeding making it dangerous for the children on bicycles or just crossing the street. Please leave this vote on the table for a later time when our country can go back to normal thank you

Joseph Summerhays more than 2 miles October 2, 2020, 8:22 AM

It's none of the city council's business deciding what other people do with their property. These people shouldn't even have to make an application. But given that we have this stupid system, you should approve their application right way. There's no need to heap further expenses on them by making them wait any longer. Let them build their whatever it is they want.

Timothy Willis inside City Boundary October 2, 2020, 4:55 AM

We have so many high density units in Provo now and so few affordable single family housing units (starter homes) does if make since to build more. Does Provo no longer want families. ??????

Christopher Hill ½ to 1 mile October 2, 2020, 1:07 AM

The area is already developed and dilapidated. Apart from demolishing and reclaiming, the next best solution would be to allow development from a green-minded developer.

I would hope that they would increase their efforts in the nature development along the road and particularly along the Provo River Trail. Both to block noise from the roadway and to block sight from the trail towards the road/buildings.

As an aside, y'all need to improve your document display system. None of the text is legible/readable on either of the plans and they don't link to any originals.

Name not shown inside Oak Hills October 1, 2020, 9:40 PM

I support people using their driveways for their trailers, etc. My concern is the growing number of boats and months-long landscaping projects blocking the shoulder, the bike lane, and even spilling into the street. This is dangerous for pedestrians, which include many children walking to bus stops along this road.