Public comment at a Tuesday Salt Lake City Council meeting considering Mayor Rocky Anderson's proposed community center solution for the Main Street Plaza came down — at roughly a 2-to-1 clip — in favor of the deal, which would end guaranteed public access and free speech on the plaza, owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Many citizens said it was time to vote on Anderson's plan, since city leaders, because of their attention to the plaza, are neglecting other important city issues, like crime, education and economic development.
"The City Council is paying too much attention (to the) Main Street Plaza," Douglas Cotant said. "This public hearing is a waste of time when we have other more important issues to take care of."
While it had initially been slated to vote on Anderson's plan Thursday, the council members decided to put off voting until June 10, when they will reopen the public hearing and take more comment on the plaza issue.
The continuation was needed, council members felt, because City Attorney Ed Rutan recently tinkered with some of the legal documents needed to make Anderson's deal happen.
The most significant change is a paragraph Rutan added stating that the City Council had considered the transportation issues related to closing off public access on Main Street Plaza before its potential vote to end that access.
The amended documents are available for inspection at www.slcgov.com/plaza.
Despite the significant support for Anderson's plan, there was also opposition to Anderson's community center solution, which seeks to trade the city's public access easement on the plaza for church-owned land in the city's Glendale neighborhood, where a community center, dubbed the Unity Center, would be built.
Many wondered how the city will pay for the community center — to be constructed with $5 million raised by the Alliance for Unity and billionaire Jim Sorenson — when it opens, since no money is currently available for its operation.
"Consider the operating costs of the unity house and what's going to happen in two to three months when you can't afford to pay for the unity house," Jim Cooper said.
Tuesday the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah sent a letter to the council stating that Anderson's plan doesn't solve the complex legal issues surrounding the plaza but rather "exacerbates the constitutional flaws in the original transaction."
When the city sold the section of Main Street between South Temple and North Temple streets to the church in 1999, it retained a public-access easement across the plaza, which the church built across Main. In response to a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in October that the easement created a free-speech forum, similar to what exists on public sidewalks.
The LDS Church — which didn't like the decision because it paid $8.1 million for the land and expected to be able to restrict some activities there — appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. Many speakers on Tuesday urged the council to wait until the Supreme Court decides if it will hear the plaza appeal.
Following the 10th Circuit Court's ruling, the city erupted in rancor between people who wanted to maintain free speech and public access on the plaza and those who wanted the city to relinquish the easement and thus total control over the property.
While ending community divisiveness over the plaza is a stated goal of Anderson's proposed solution, some speakers Tuesday said there was no community divisiveness, rather the only problem was that the LDS Church was angry with the 10th Circuit's decision.
"The only divisiveness is that the LDS Church is angry because it doesn't have control over what happens on the easement," Jan Bartlett said.
Pamela Atkinson, a member of the Alliance for Unity, said the plaza needs to be preserved as a peaceful place. She said she saw one homeless man on the plaza Tuesday who was enjoying the plaza's peace.
However, it was unclear whether that man would be allowed on the plaza if the church regained the authority to limit the kinds of people who go there. Previously, the church outlawed panhandling, certain expressions on T-shirts and other clothing, smoking, swearing, proselytizing and other activities commonly allowed on public sidewalks.
Anderson's plan would again give the church officials sole authority to ban whomever they wanted from the plaza.
Many LDS Church members stated Tuesday that the plaza needs to be kept private so the church can prevent Christian and Baptist street preachers from yelling proselytizing remarks to wedding parties.
Those same preachers countered that the council needs to keep their free-speech rights intact.
"I urge you not to sell out our free speech rights," Brent Hardy said. "They were given by men who understood my rights were given by God."
Others said it is important for downtown development that the plaza remain a religious sanctuary for LDS Church members so that the LDS temple will continue to attract hordes of visitors who spend money while visiting town.
Three council members — Carlton Christensen, Van Turner and Dave Buhler — have said they will vote for Anderson's plan, while Nancy Saxton has said she will not support vacating the city's public access easement. Three others remain — for the record — undecided.
E-mail: bsnyder@desnews.com