A Dog Gone Failure

There was a lot of fanfare about Butte's first dog park. Too bad the provisions provided for dogs are a total failure. At least, that was the consensus of the 20 plus people that attended the first of many community council dog meetings held at racetrack fire hall.

If you have not used the new dog park at Skyline Park (behind NCAT) you should make an attempt. The dog pens are 1/4 mile away from the parking lot, for a 1/2 mile round trip. This may be fine for a person that wants exercise but for people with limited mobility and older citizens, this is a problem. 

The route is not paved all the way so it is not ADA accessible. Once you get to the pens you find a barren waste land of gravel, weeds and broken glass - not the kind of interactive place for dog owners to meet and socialize their dogs. Dog owners tried to participate in the design but were ignored during the process.

The first, most obvious flaw with the design is that dogs pee and poop when they get out of a car. Why would you put a children's playground immediately next to the parking lot shared by both the dog owners and others utilizing the park? There should be a separate parking area for people with dogs that would eliminate any conflict between users.

There is a whole list of improvements that could actually make this a usable park for dogs, their owners and other uses - but that is a long list!

It has been announced by BSB that this was Butte's first dog park and they are learning a lot and are thinking about changes. Too little, too late!! There are plenty of examples around the state and in other communities that could have been looked at.

But most importantly, and most left out of the process, were Butte’s own dog owners. If this group would have been brought together and listened to, the solution to a quality design would have been obvious.

A dog park should be just that: a park. A place for people and pets to be 

Not a Student in Sight

Where were the Tech Students and their bicycles?

Wednesday night's council meeting was inspiring with many new faces attending to show their support of improving Park Street; but with most questioning the need for a central landscaped median and the reduction from 4 lanes to 2 lanes.

What was noticeable, was that there were ZERO Tech students in attendance as well as any representatives of Montana Tech. I am assuming that their input has been addressed in private meetings and that they did not have to attend public meetings.

My strong opinion is "Let's keep W. Park Street 4 lanes and put the pedestrians and bicycles on the adjacent and safe streets of Galena and Broadway!"

The presentation by BSB Staff and further statements by Planning Director Jon Sesso noted that the preliminary traffic count for Park Street did not justify 4 lanes of traffic capacity. By only utilizing traffic count as a planning formula, the true nature of the roadway is not fully considered.

The full capacity of 4 lanes is required by the nature of morning "going to work travel" and student travel when classes let out and students are going to class. Sporting and other events at Tech fill Park Street when they let out. By only utilizing a total count, without consideration of the hours of the day and events, the formula is dangerously flawed.

It snuck out during the presentation that the program of 2 lanes, landscaped median, bike lanes and landscaped "parkletts" is what has already been presented to the Montana Department of Transportation as the requirements for the street design!  

Time is close to running out to change the direction of this project and provide substantive input. Please submit your communitarian letter that supports your opinion to the council- whatever that may be. Your public participation and involvement is commendable.  

W. Park Street Magical Mystery People Mover

Slow it down on W. Park Street?

It's apparently summer 12 months of the year here in Butte, MT!

I did not know that Park Street was located south of the Mason-Dixon Line in a slow paced southern clime where it does not snow and you relax on a "Parklet" bench to the sounds of the steady clip-clop of a horse pulling a surrey with fringe on top.

Come on everyone! The 4 lanes of Park Street are a vital and efficient corridor that moves our community safely to and from the West Side and Montana Tech. Going to 2 lanes with bike lanes is simply asking for a student late for class to zip around a slower car using the bike lane. The assumption that bike lanes should be placed on a primary automobile route is another misguided makeover.  

Let us not forget that it snows in Butte MT. Yes it snows and this is a primary route for motorists. It is being proposed that a landscaped median be introduced. This misguided make-over interferes with snow removal. During the winter snows this central area is allocated to windrows of snow for pick-up, which effectively turns Park Street into 2 lanes anyway. Piling snow on the median with planted shrubs will certainly kill the landscaping. During our short months of summer the landscaping will be baked dry by the asphalt and require significant water.

Left turning lanes with "Bike Boxes" are proposed. We already have left turn lanes: they are called the left lane of a 4 lane road. Arrows and signage work for this in conjunction with other improvements providing the turning lanes. Again, placing bikes on a major road artery is misguided and dangerous. The proper location for bikes is to share the road on the 2 adjacent residential streets of Broadway and Galena.  These are residential streets where the inhabitants want traffic to travel slowly. Grades are appropriate and speed limits and signage and road markers work to share the road.

There is all this talk of slowing down and enjoying the drive. I don't know about you but my life is limited on time and having a clear efficient route is important in my day to day rounds. If people are speeding, is this not an enforcement issue? At tech there is a radar sign that indicates your speed, lots of ways to control speed instead of blocking an effective 4 lane primary route.

A computer generated town was presented in the paper. It is obviously somewhere in the Southern United States and is given as an idealized example. The town has no hills and obviously no snow. This computer-aided BS (yes, bullshit) shows an imagined business district - what is significantly wrong with this depiction is that West Park Street is in actuality a street lined with residences. Only a small scattering of businesses exist and imposing additional business only reduces the impressive quality of historic homes.

There is a convenience store (our neighborhood grocery store), a pasty shop, Laundromat, a restaurant, pizza parlor/bar, and a doctor's office. These current businesses serve the corridor well and introducing additional competition will not assist in their survival.  

The closest real business area is east of Idaho Street on Park Street. That is where improvement efforts for business should be made and should have been being made for decades. The core of the Uptown is effectively only 8 blocks away. Let's not make a residential area with historic homes into something that it is not!

There is a place for the concept of traffic slowing with a reduction of two lanes and bump-out landscaping. In fact, I worked extensively with Bob Poor's efforts to place the Tech Arch and make the trail crossing safer for pedestrians. The bottom of the hill up to tech is the logical place to slow things down, but not before that.

So where is the ideal place for all the proposed improvements? Those visionary improvements should be concentrated at Montana Tech; from Marcus Daily statue to the west through campus. Reduce the width of asphalt, widen sidewalks, provide seating, install bike lanes and bike racks, and insert little landscaped "parklets". On street loading/unloading zones for delivery of goods as well as pick-up and drop-off of students. These type of improvements work well within the reduced speed limits of Montana Tech. The central landscaped median would work well here in slowing down traffic and as a central protected area for pedestrians. With minimum modifications a turn-a-round Marcus' statue can serve as a drop-off that would limit a drive through of campus when classes change.

So what about the remainder of Park Street? There is MDOT funding available! Where I believe the effort should be made is to enhance pedestrian safety in conjunction with repaving the street. The concept of handicap accessible bump-outs is valid at all intersections along Park Street. Instead of a lot of landscaping in the bump-outs some hard-scape such as historic cobble stones, iron work and some (pedestrian protective) flower-planters would enhance the corridor. Historically appropriate lighting at the intersections with cross walk use signals would also be appropriate. Existing street lighting can be enhanced, with historic inspired light heads with light cut-off to limit glare into homes. Historically detailed decorative banner mounts can be added to light poles for the mounting of semi-permanent tech banners that can also be lighted to indicate the desired Tech corridor.

So I have called out recommendation in words, but these out of town consultants know what they are doing - right? Remember the $280/hour concept of reverse angle parking? The professional who didn’t even know it snowed here?

 Who do you think you are some sort of professional designer? Well I have 35 years of experience in understanding of the Historic District and yes I am a profession designer, a licensed Architect in the State of Montana.

 So I will be doing what Architects do - which is putting my concepts and recommendation on paper and sharing them with others and participating in the upcoming public meetings. 

Vacuous Truth and the Vacant Building Ordinance

Dailykos.com on Vacuous Truth:

“Often we can start with a false statement and prove anything we like, if we know how to pull the right implication from the initial falsehood.”

A new ordinance was just passed that reduces your personal property rights! It will be selectively enforced (as most ordinances are by BSB) and used to target specific people.

This new ordinance is the vacant building registry. The great thing about this passage is that the first issuance of a violation notice will have to go to Butte-Silver Bow. Community Enrichment will be handing the notice to Chief Executive Vincent for 8 vacant buildings at the Anselmo Mineyard. These Nationally significant historic structures do in fact fully meet the violation provisions for registry of vacant buildings in this new ordinance.

The registration fee will be $25/year for each vacant building. With these 8 vacant buildings the registration cost for BSB will be $200. If BSB fails to register these buildings, a $500 per building violation fee will be charged, for a total of $4,000 per the ordinance.

With the registry BSB will have to submit written requirements to Community Enrichment of their plans and timetable for the care and closure of each of these structures. These closures will have to meet the Secretary of the Interior Standards per BSB requirements of the use of public funds and as a Certified Local Government that is established as a federally established program.

Of course, this would be an example of BSB not having its own house in order before writing an ordinance for the sole purpose of being able to bully their way onto citizen’s private property and make an uninformed and uneducated judgement call against their building.

As the local expert on Butte buildings I can tell you this: there is no one on BSB staff that is qualified to make these judgement calls. But they will be made anyway, and enforced with vigor.

It is a sad state of affairs that our local government works against its own citizens who take pride in owning their historic properties and make investment in them as they can afford to. 

WHY the Heck I'm running!

The French De-connection

I have been questioned a lot since I announced my candidacy for Chief Executive. Why am I getting back into government? (I never really left), when or why did you decide? Well…..I decided 2 ½ years ago. I will explain WHY in this post.

My wife and I were major supporters of Matt Vincent in 2012, as we felt there would be a major change in management, procedures and openness in local government based on Matt’s campaign platform. We used our Uptown Works storefront for months to show our support, and eagerly discussed this choice with the many residents that came into our shop. Because of my background in local government, people regularly sought me out for discussion.

Soon into the new administration I was asked by the Executive Director of the Butte Silver Bow Arts Foundation (BSBAF) to accompany her to a meeting with Chief Executive VIncent. My involvement with the Chateau spanned over 3 decades during which time I was a long-time Board Member, one-term VP, and donated much time, money and physical labor. I understood the struggles as well as the community-steeped history of the BSBAF-Chateau connection.

It was not apparent to me at that meeting that Matt had other plans for the Chateau. It was a slow dawning. Because I could not believe that anyone would divisively and intentionally sever these 4 decades-long ties without doing everything in their power to make it work.

It was agreed that the BSBAF was spread too thin, and that the focus had moved from its original focus of the Chateau to include the YMCA and Venus Rising Coffee shop. And this was a situation the Executive Director stepped into, not one she created.

As certain people in the arts community tried to be elected, unsuccessfully, to the board, my wife and I were invited to join. My wife was soon named President, a position she took very seriously. We agreed as a group to downsize and focus back on the Chateau. We worked closely with BSB, keeping them informed, filling out requested paperwork, etc. We were working with Cinda Holt of the Montana Arts Council to reorganize our business plan. We planned to close the doors for 6 months, reorganize, and reopen with a new mission statement and business focus. The sale of the YMCA was in process and everything was right on track. Per the Chief Executive’s directives.

However, the one thing we could not accomplish on the Chief Executive’s checklist was removing the Executive Director from her position.

So, in the eleventh hour and with no warning, Chief Executive Vincent pulled the lease on the BSBAF and locked the Chateau doors. The 4 decades-old Foundation that had supported the Chateau's care and rehabilitation with the Butte Heritage Cook Book was basically cut off at the knees.

The tragedy of this loss of partnership is that many Butte families, with deep roots, donated precious family heirlooms to the Foundation with the understanding they would be safe at the Chateau in perpetuity. In essence, they became a museum pieces of Butte’s legacy. By giving the BSBAF 30 days to remove all their belongings from the Chateau, BSB effectively sank a priceless ship and weakened a community-supported arts foundation that had existed and serviced the Butte community for 40 years, successfully.

This chain of events was a huge harbinger for me of the future of this administration. Favoritism, targeting, aggressive enforcement of personal decisions, destroying local history. Everything local government should not do. It should have been the opposite: Doing whatever was necessary to support and ensure success of the BSBAF/Chateau partnership. Working WITH the people rather than AGAINST them. 

It was an easy decision to make 2 ½ years ago to run for Chief Executive, to sell our business uptown, and turn my focus back to the people I had served for over 21 years. People that still call me and ask what has happened to their family heirlooms.

I do not agree with Matt Vincent’s policies. This does not mean I don’t like him. He is a fine family man, has a great sense of humor, and I even shared an office with him for a while at BSB.

I feel he has done a huge disservice to Butte by dissolving the partnership with the BSBAF and the Chateau. And yes, great things are happening at the Chateau now, but that is not the point of why I am running.

My Fault, Your Fault, Asphalt

 The Gilman site for the new City-County Shops is not quite in my back yard, but close. My preference would have been the Mansfield Technology Park for the County Shops and the Asphalt Batch Plant, but that is over and done with.

There is though, a new matter that does need immediate public input and participation. The moving of the asphalt batch plant. I do not understand why it is so difficult to put together citizen groups and hold public meetings to look at this next big issue that is coming the community’s way.

 When the question is asked: “What about the batch plant?” - it is all “hush! hush! That is not on the table! That is not part of this discussion".... bla bla government Ga Ga!

The string on the bag that holds the cat was loosened a bit at Wednesday's (2/3) Council of Commissioners meeting - the Centennial Concrete site (that has the animal shelter on an isolated property island within the acreage) was also in the running for shop selection and could have been purchased as a site for shop relocation, but was not a finalist.

 What was quietly stated at the meeting was that Centennial Concrete site is M-2 industrial, and that current designation is zoned heavy industrial and can contain the asphalt batch plant. This site is immediately east of "Gilman". This adjacency could be beneficial in the consolidation of City-county equipment and services or could be a disaster.

What is “community planning?” It is looking at all the issues, collecting public comments, and defining the problem to be solved. So for the best solution to the batch plant location we should get started now. It is obvious that we need to get the batch plant out of the Silver Bow Creek corridor, see what opportunities exist and what historic smelter resources can be interpreted and what historic structures need to be removed or modified to protect the environment.

 If the County Shop relocation and the Batch Plant was a comprehensive professional community planning effort, it would include the many issues of the creek corridor.  The comprehensive plan would include the "Restore Our Creek" visioning, the landscaped look of a clean Montana Pole site, and a vision for and realized opportunities of Silver Bow Creek west of Montana Street (LAO). Comprehensive planning would also consider the design of Centennial Avenue and the potential opportunities of improving grouped BSB facilities that are adjacent to metro sewer.

The Centennial Concrete site brings to mind a famous individual in 1917 that dared to speak his mind and ended up swinging by his neck from a small railroad trestle with a note pinned on his chest, when this acreage was the Centennial Brewery. Remnants of the wood trestle (the west "Y" rail switch back) may still remain buried under railroad ballast. It is likely good that this makeshift gallows is no longer exposed so it can't be utilized if someone dares to voice their opinion for the benefit of the citizenry.

So let us open up the discussion to the public, utilize professional planning and architectural services in the design with less reliance on powder dry engineering design.  Make sure that all environmental and visual issues are addressed along with other buffering amenities that are introduced to lessen impacts to the neighborhoods.

What might come of this is a fully landscaped buffered County Shops, batch plant and a new modern animal shelter with a quality dog park, a shelter where all animals are adopted. Now that is a vision and not a lot of Ga GA!

Shops Till You Drop!

We should have "Shopped Around" more! There was an almost nonexistent public process for relocating the County Shops, and now a location has been decided upon. 

The justification for no public input was that "no one wished to have the shops in their back yard", so why bother with public input. As Steve Martin use to say "EXCUSSSSSSSE MEEEEE!!!!!" ..... dismissing the public is not a matter for BSB staff to make the executive decision to exclude valid public comment.

Public input on the shop location was replaced with bar charts and engineering data with no citizen comments on neighborhoods desires or visual impact considered. The locating of the shops was all about the data and bar charts and the lowest cost, just by a horse racing "nose".

Months before this final Wednesday night (2/3) Council decision there was a half-baked announcement for public comment. The public comments surprised the Administration in that actual educated public comment was given by many knowledgeable citizens. The unified preference, presented in logical argument, was to locate the shops and batch plant remotely to the south in the Mansfield technology park. This unwelcomed public comment had to be battled with more adjustment of "Too much acreage, and the buildings are too large" and more Ga Ga! But the juggernaut of pie charts rolled on and on and low and behold the Montana Pole plant site came out ahead once again.  The funny thing about facts and figures is that they can be arrange to produce and outcome that you desire that is supported with the lowest cost. The humor continues when you view the charts of pies and bars and the cost differentials between all sites is minuscule.

In looking at the Montana Pole site it would have been nice if the closed doors were opened to the public and the real motivations and possible cost saving of using remedy money instead of restoration money was discussed with the public, but the public was not trusted and that is now a lost opportunity. The contamination of the site and adjacency to neighborhoods was fortunately communicated through various commissioners as additional public input.

In a full court press, the Administration kept the Pole Plant in the game, with the final game between 2 final sites, MT pole and "Gilman" across from metro sewer. As aforementioned, the pubic did rally and did call their Commissioners saying "don't put it on a dioxin poised site" and that families really did not want it in their neighborhood and in a primary view shed of the community - bravo citizens!

On Wednesday the council was getting close to including a backup site as commissioner discussions continued and motions were made that excluded Montana Pole. It seemed that the Mansfield Technology Park would be added as a backup site and would still be in the running for continued consideration. But that ended when Commissioner Sheryl Ralf made a motion to "End All Motions" but included dropping out the pole plant  in the motion (that was a modified motion) - that motion was not correct according "to Hoyle" - someone needs to review the rules of order!

What it came down to is that only one site was selected, a site that is not that bad but not perfect for the town with its placement in the heart of the community. If you were able to go back in time in this process and impose professional planning means in site selection, a comprehensive effort that included all possible sites, public input and view shed analysis you would see that there were many, many missed opportunities . But the milk is spilt and let's not cry, the positive aspect is that the selected site is across from the new and improved sewer plant and consolidation of Butte-Silver Bow facilities may work out to the benefit of the community.

The shop site selected will be partially sheltered to a point with a road-berm and is zoned correctly for the facility. This also means that the Parrot tailings removal can commence; but let us not forget that there a 3 other smelter tailing deposits downstream from the Parrot deposit for a required creek corridor to the confluence at Montana Street. Extensive removal must take place in order to restore our creek... all other agency and government words to the contrary are just Ga Ga!

Naked at The Last Supper

Speaking publicly at the Council of Commissioner's meeting is like the bad dream we've all had where you find yourself naked in the classroom in front of your peers - and no one is paying attention.

Upon entering the Council Chambers you have unwittingly walked into a dream-like vision of The Last Supper - 12 Commissioners surrounding a central figure. When it is finally your turn to speak, you must stand for judgement before the elevated council with your backside exposed to the audience.

I have seen brave citizens stand up on Wednesday nights to make their statements, imploring the Council to listen to their carefully prepared speech on an issue of great importance to them. Their voice begins to tremble with nerves when they become aware of how incredibly exposed they feel. Many of the Council members shuffle papers, check their computers, text, or simply look away bored as they mentally prepare for their upcoming verbal battle. The citizen's carefully crafted words have become background noise in the cavernous chamber.

I do not blame the Commissioners for this entire situation. The problem exists because the Council is always in a reactionary mode rather than a forward-looking citizen-generated mode. The separation between the Executive Branch (Chief Executive and staff) and the Legislative Branch (Council of Commissioners) has become confused and is currently out of compliance with our Charter Form of Government.

But that does not negate the fact that ALL citizens taking the time and finding the bravery to speak should be treated with the same basic respect and attention from every Commissioner. I assure you I will make this a priority.

But until then, you should put "Testifying in front of the Council" on your bucket list so that you may experience the one-time rush of embarrassment of finding yourself naked in public while you are completely ignored by most!

Now, that is Government GaGa!