Utah lawmakers are discussing a massive multi-million dollar cut to the state’s education fund.

If that doesn’t have you worried, it should.

Utah educators have endured largely stagnant wages and bursting class sizes for years, particularly during the Great Recession. Though that economic dip has long since corrected, Utah education never recovered and we remain firmly committed to our last place in the nation for per pupil spending. In fact, the recent Voices for Utah’s Children 2019 Children’s Budget Report finds per pupil spending is down 1.3 percent (adjusted for inflation) from before the recession and education funds were $41 million lower last year than the year before.

Meanwhile, unfunded mandates on teachers continue unabated. The last time I calculated my work hours during the school year, I found I put in the same time expected of a white collar professional over 12 months during my nine-month school contract. My second job added three more months of work, calculated by hours.

It’s an exhausting pace and I’ve been told I must be inefficient with my time, but you won’t find a more cost efficient group of teachers in the country when calculating class size and pay. It takes twice as long to grade essays when you have twice the students, as Utah teachers often do, unless we cut corners on their education. At some point, you get what you pay for.

We love the students and put our hearts and souls into the work, but free market economics has pushed the education profession past the breaking point. The common myth that “money doesn’t matter” in education needs to be settled once and for all. We aren’t preparing enough teachers through university programs to replace those retiring in the near future. Next school year will see a significant bump in retirements and it’s already too late to properly prepare their replacements.

University students are voting with their feet, and with good reason: The nationwide pay penalty for choosing to teach is roughly 20 percent lower weekly earnings than other college educated workers, according to a recent Economic Policy Institute report. It’s a 32 percent penalty for Utah teachers. Summer jobs don’t fill that gap. Temp work pay is usually even worse.

The problem is here and now. Many schools have unqualified substitute teachers permanently staffing classrooms. Irregular substitute jobs often go unfilled, pulling other teachers out of their normal classrooms because there’s a substitute shortage too. Twenty-nine-hour teacher aide positions are unfilled because prospective applicants quickly figure out they can earn more money working in a call center or flipping burgers. Teacher turnover is particularly concerning for new educators, and significantly worse for unprepared teachers pursuing Alternate Routes to Licensure. This exacerbates turnover because experienced teachers are expected to support them while they learn on the job. We’re losing mid-career teachers who get fed up with uncompensated demands on their time.

Research is absolutely clear that money matters in education, with some caveats. The Learning Policy Institute reported in December 2017 that “aggregate per-pupil spending is positively associated with improved student outcomes.” The Brookings Institute reported in March 2017 that short term money does not improve student learning, probably because of how it is spent. However, “changes in spending induced by state education finance reforms improved outcomes such as test scores, high school graduation, and earnings.” In other words, long-term money, wisely invested, absolutely correlates to improved student learning.

If we really do want a home-grown, well-educated competitive workforce, we must invest in education beyond growth. Too many Utah students are already suffering the consequences of miserly funding and if current trends continue, we’ll see the ongoing slow-motion teacher walkout get a lot worse before it gets better. Utah students and teachers deserve better.

It’s true that income tax revenues are up this year, and this is cause for celebration — for Utah students.

The Utah income tax is the education fund, per the Utah Constitution. Any cut to Utah’s income tax is a cut to education. Full stop.

Deborah Gatrell is a social studies teacher in Granite District and Utah Teacher Fellow working to amplify teacher voice in education policy. Follow her on Twitter @DeborahGatrell1 or continue the conversation by emailing her at deborah.gatrell@hsgfellow.org.

Utah is losing highly qualified teachers and our children are the ones who ultimately pay the price.

The teacher shortage is not new and is not unique to Utah. It is an issue we cannot keep pretending we don’t know how to fix. We owe it to our children to increase funding to public education. New resources will allow the state and individual districts the flexibility to raise Utah teachers’ salaries and make the profession more attractive.

While the national average public school teacher salary for 2016 was $59,660, Utah’s average teacher salary was a mere $46,042, leaving us at a disappointing fifth from the bottom in national rankings (NEA and edbuild.org). Low salaries combined with increasing pressures have led to our current teacher shortage and left students with a less stable educational experience.

As a mother and teacher, I have spent thousands of my own dollars on classroom supplies, as well as hundreds in helping my children’s teachers furnish their classrooms with tissue, hand sanitizer, books, crayons … the list goes on. I am not aware of another profession in which employees must purchase their own desk chairs, pay to make copies, provide fans for rooms that reach 90 degrees or more during the warmer months or the myriad of other purchases the vast majority of teachers in this state must make to create healthy environments for learning.

Increased spending on education, and in particular an increase in teacher salary, is a notion supported by Gov. Gary Herbert and is essential to reversing the shortage and providing our children with the education they deserve. How do we make teaching an attractive or worthwhile option if we refuse to offer a wage that is commensurate with a teacher’s education level, continual training, and the hours they put in? (Teachers work a national average of 50 hours per week and, no, we do not have paid summers off.)

As Utah legislators move toward final approval of the education budget, they must carefully consider how their decisions impact our students.

An increase in teacher salary will send the message that Utah teachers are valued, that our children need them, and that our communities are grateful for what they do. Approximately two-thirds of Utahns feel more funding, via an increase in taxes, is needed for Utah public schools (utahpolicy.com).

We all depend on a well-educated populace in order for our economy to flourish, but we cannot continue to ignore teacher salary, in combination with the increasing demands of the career, if we wish to produce graduates who are prepared to fully contribute to bettering our society.

Teaching is a profession that requires years of training and preparation, as well as ongoing education and training. It is time to recognize teachers as the professionals they are and to compensate them accordingly. The well-being of our state depends on it and, above all, our children deserve the best teachers and highest quality education they can get.

We need to remind our legislators of the old adage, “You get what you pay for.” Utah, we owe it to our children to stand up and fight to make the teaching profession more attractive by increasing teacher salaries.

Chera Fernelius is a mother of two junior high students and one elementary student and an English teacher at Farmington Junior High School in the Davis School District.

Over 160,000 new people, or 70 percent of the entire population growth of Salt Lake County, have made the southwest communities of West Jordan, South Jordan, Riverton, Herriman, Copperton and Bluffdale their home since 2000. About half of the increase is now attributed to move-ins from other states – in large part due to successful recruiting efforts by the state to relocate certain businesses and industries to the region.

With around half of the undeveloped acreage left in the county, this quadrant has seen a flurry of housing activity of all types to help accommodate this growth, increasing the average multifamily housing to approximately 30 percent to 40 percent or more of all housing stock in our communities. These levels are on par or greater than other areas of the county.

With the rapid growth in this part of the county, moving folks around is a challenge. Here are some interesting facts that affect the transportation issues in the southwest quadrant of the Salt Lake Valley:

• There are 12 driving miles between I-15 and the western parts of Herriman, South Jordan and West Jordan, compared to just 6 miles from I-15 to Wasatch Boulevard on the county’s east side. This is twice the distance with no freeway-style east-west connectors comparable to I-215.
• The 2040 traffic count projections for the southwest communities are exponentially higher than today, with some major intersections already in failure status.
• Based on 2040 projections, Mountain View Corridor, which didn’t even exist in 2010, is projected to have as many cars traveling on it as I-15 did in 2010 (more than 150,000). Bangerter Highway has the same traffic projections. This means that between Bangerter Highway and Mountain View Corridor there will be the equivalent of two I-15s running through the southwest part of the valley.
• There is a significant lack of public transportation in the southwest communities.

As we continue to work with the Legislature, Salt Lake County and the development community to address housing needs, we must also continue to place high priority on the critical transportation and other infrastructure needs our cities are experiencing. Ask any resident in the area, or drive through the quadrant during peak hours, and you will hear about the infrastructure challenge to keep up with our rapid expansion. The southwest communities are working to bring more jobs to the area to decrease the need for residents to commute to other areas in an effort to increase air quality and decrease traffic impacts.

As representatives of our respective cities, we are working together to understand the collective impact of our planning decisions. We want to think regionally and act locally, and we support legislation that encourages wise comprehensive planning measures, while still allowing cities the flexibility to determine the way we grow.

As a group, we are working to secure funding ($250,000) for a first-ever comprehensive visioning study for this part of the valley. The study will make recommendations on how to better integrate our networks – roadway, active transportation, and transit. Salt Lake County has already awarded the effort with $100,000, with an application for an additional $125,000 from the Wasatch Front Regional Council, now pending. Cities are also contributing a combined $25,000. This is a critical step and we appreciate the support of Salt Lake County, and others, with this process.

As southwest communities, our focus is on sustainability. We are meeting weekly with our legislators and receiving regular input from others, including the Utah Department of Transportation and the Utah Transit Authority. This collaboration is invaluable as we work to explore solutions to our transportation needs, including future funding of Mountain View Corridor and finishing the conversion of Bangerter Highway to a full freeway.

Given the wide geography of the southwest area, the critical level of traffic counts in this region and our significant areas that lack interstate connectivity, we implore the state, Wasatch Front Regional Council, Salt Lake County and others to continue to work with us and invest in the requisite infrastructure for current and future demand levels in this rapidly expanding area of the Wasatch Front.

Submitted by Bluffdale Mayor Derk Timothy, Copperton Mayor Sean Clayton, Herriman Mayor Pro Tempore Jared Henderson, Riverton Mayor Trent Staggs, South Jordan Mayor Dawn Ramsey and West Jordan Mayor Jim Riding.

Twistlab Marketing, a full-service marketing agency based in Cottonwood Heights, caters to small businesses inside and outside of Utah. It prides itself in providing clients with exceptional marketing strategies, campaigns and products with a twist.

“My favorite part about Twistlab is the welcoming environment to creative ideas,” said account manager Satin Tashnizi. “It feels refreshing to be supported by your team to make suggestions and even spearhead projects. This has been a unique experience to Twistlab.”

The company’s positive work environment was rewarded last year when it was selected as one of Utah’s Top Workplaces by The Salt Lake Tribune and its partner, Energage, an employee research and consulting firm based in Philadelphia.

It was one of 85 companies in Utah recognized in 2018 based on surveys completed by their employees about the office culture and environment. Twistlab ranked fourth in the small company/organization category last year and the company embraced the recognition, said Sam Omer, business manager at Twistlab.

“The response was overwhelmingly positive," he said. “Everyone felt honored to be a part of this and felt proud to have helped Twistlab get to this point.”

Twistlab employee Emily Farr agrees. “There was a ‘high-five’ atmosphere, and it really motivated us to work harder by reinforcing something that we already knew — that Twistlab was a great place to be. I think that it attracted people to work for the company as well because we saw a bit of a surge in applicants.”

How to nominate a business

Year six is now at hand, and The Tribune is seeking nominations from workers who believe their companies — whether small, medium or large — look out for their employees, show them that they are valued and give them the resources to do their jobs in an efficient and satisfying manner.

Nomination forms are available at sltrib.com/nominate. The deadline is April 12.

Any organization with 35 or more employees in Utah — public, private, nonprofit, government — is eligible to participate. Once an organization is nominated, its employees will be emailed a short 24-question survey seeking information about aspects of workplace operations that can separate the good from the mediocre. The survey period runs March through May.

In past years, said Energage CEO Doug Claffey, employees have been eager to respond to these questionnaires. Last year, organizations sent surveys to 35,827 Utah employees at 125 companies and agencies, with more than 800 organizations invited to participate. It got 22,686 back, a response rate of nearly 63 percent.

Energage conducts Top Workplaces surveys for 50 major metro newspapers and surveyed 2.6 million employees at more than 7,500 organizations across the country in 2018.

And the winners are ...

Many of Twistlab’s employees feel a sense of community at their work. “I feel open to ask my colleagues for help whenever I need it and never feel discouraged to suggest improvements,” said Martika Heath, analytics manager.

While Twistlab Marketing made the ranks in 2018 for the first time (along with 29 other Utah businesses), a number of companies have won Top Workplace awards for the past five years.

Small (1-124 employees)

• Diversified Insurance Group, Salt Lake City.
• Get Away Today Vacations, South Ogden.
• Pinnacle Quality Insight, Sandy.
• HealthInsight Utah, Murray.

Midsize (125-399 employees)

• BambooHR LLC, Lindon.
• Encompass Home Health & Hospice, Dallas.
• Health Catalyst, Cottonwood Heights.
• Sirsi Corp., Lehi.

Large (400+ employees)

• Prestige Financial, Draper.
• O.C. Tanner, Salt Lake City.
• Discover Financial Services, Riverwoods, Ill.
• Salt Lake County Public Library, West Jordan.

To join the survey, an employee, employer or customer may nominate a Utah company by April 12 at sltrib.com/nominate or by calling 801-803-6841.

The characters prowl the stage. They glare and curse and get in each other’s faces. They stand and sit with their legs wide and they walk hips first.

“Men on Boats” is based on the true story of John Wesley Powell and his crew’s swashbuckling quest to explore the Colorado River and the Grand Canyon in 1869.

But not one man appears on stage. All 10 are played by women.

Like the musical “Hamilton,” the play — being performed by the University of Utah’s Department of Theatre through March 10 — retells history, implicitly questions who gets to tell stories and whose stories are told, and features an inclusive cast.

“The characters in ‘Men on Boats’ were historically cisgender white males,” reads the playwright’s casting notes. “The cast should be made up entirely of people who are not.”

The U. cast members aren’t women playing men by binding their chests or wearing beards, said director Sarah Shippobotham. Instead, the transformation was as much internal as external. They are women who are exuding the boundless confidence of a white man exploring the Western frontier.

“We talked about the notion of taking up space — men take up space more than women do — and what does it feel like to really just be OK” with that, she said.

While society talks about women being equal to men, “we still live in a world that doesn’t function that way. We have a lot of baggage or a lot of inherent feelings about how we operate in the world,” Shippobotham said.

It was an eye-opening — some said even life-changing — lesson on and off the stage for students at both the U. and at Westminster College, which produced “Men on Boats” in October. In interviews, the actors say they walk taller now. They spread out. They apologize less.

“That experience was the most we’ve grown in our lives,” said Mina Sadoon, who played Powell at Westminster and has talked about the changes with her fellow performers. “I feel like I’m more grounded. I don’t feel like I need to look down. I feel like I’m more equal.”

‘Start to make a change’

First produced in 2016 in New York City, “Men on Boats” retells the story of Powell’s expedition traversing the Colorado and Green rivers from Wyoming Territory to the Grand Canyon. It features the real men who accompanied him and is based on Powell’s journals, which playwright Jaclyn Backhaus (who grew up in Arizona) read as a child.

The U.’s production coincides with the 150th anniversary of the adventure. Using a backdrop that evokes redrock canyons, ropes to simulate boat frames and dance-like choreography to mimic near-drownings, the play recounts the men’s yearning for adventure, their infighting and the terrifying thrills and spills on the river.

Utah audiences will be familiar with the scenery, if not the story, of the Civil War veteran’s command of a nine-man crew through present-day Colorado, Utah, Arizona and Nevada. The canyons are packed with the names Powell bestowed, from Flaming Gorge to Glen Canyon and even the names of the mountain ranges and rapids in between (including Disaster Falls, after losing a boat during the 1869 trip).

The play pokes fun at that male drive to dominate. In a couple of scenes, the characters Powell and William Dunn (a hunter and trapper) giddily survey the landscape to find things to possess. They say they must follow the “Unwritten Rules for Getting Something Named After You,” including being the “sole discoverer of the thing” and that “no one objects and everyone agrees.”

They brush aside that Native Americans and other white men have traversed the rivers before. “They’ve also probably named all this land already,” says Powell. “And here we are / naming it after ourselves.”

By the end, the viewer wonders why Powell’s name survives and the others are lost to Wikipedia.

“He wasn’t the most equipped person to lead a trip through the Grand Canyon,” said Mary-Helen Pitman, who plays Powell at the U. Yet “most remember John Wesley Powell. He has a lake named after him, and the rest of the crew was forgotten.”

The main female “characters” in the play are the boats: Emma Dean, Kitty Clyde’s Sister and Maid of the Canyon. By casting women in male roles, women’s erasure from history becomes that much more glaring.

“A lot of women were excluded from these adventures and opportunities when they were actually happening at the start of this country,” Pitman said. Theater, she believes, can correct those mistakes: “The biggest and most exciting message of the story is that opportunities are equalizing. We can start to make a change in our country from the way we tell and share stories.”

Mark Fossen, who directed the Westminster play and is the literary adviser for the U.’s production, agreed: “This play is about a reclamation of history. It’s the same project in ‘Hamilton’ about saying, ‘This is a history that used to belong to white men and it really belongs to all of us.’”

‘You’re completely confident’

To get into character, the U. actors went to City Creek Center to observe how men move.

Nadia Sine, who plays boatman O.G. Howland and Ute chief Tsauwiat, watched many men slouch, lean forward, splay out their legs. While the average woman leads with her chest and bounces, men walk close to the ground, she noticed. “It’s like the bold sense of they can do whatever they want. It’s a certain confidence men have.”

To play O.G. Howland, Sine walks with her elbows out and takes large steps. As the Ute chief, she stands erect, her face implacable.

Had the playwright wanted men to play the roles, it would be like watching a historical documentary, Sine said. With women, it’s more entertaining and empowering. “We have as much ability and power to personify these characters as men. It’s another opportunity to embrace that. Men [also] have the capability to play women. It doesn’t have to be drag or cross dress.”

At Westminster, Fossen said rehearsals weren’t firing at first. Then he offered some advice that he was surprised he needed to give in 2019.

“When you are arguing with somebody, don’t back down,” he told the actors. “Don’t apologize. Don’t worry about what everybody things about you. You’re right. You’re completely confident in every action.”

They needed permission, he said, to “have the confidence of a totally mediocre white guy.”

Sadoon, who played Powell, said the advice, and acting like a man, changed her life. Culturally, women are raised to be quiet, timid and shy, she said. She would sneeze in class and apologize. Even on stage, in other performances, she’s been told she’s too loud, too much. But for “Men on Boats,” she said she played big and bold.

“Mark telling us that it was OK to be like that on stage, that made me realize that it’s OK to be like that in person. It’s OK to be loud and obnoxious and what white men could be. What I have to say is just as important as what they say,” Sadoon said.

During the first rehearsal of “Men on Boats,” Sadoon said, she felt like Juliet in “Romeo and Juliet,” meek and mild. More recently, she auditioned for a role in a Shakespeare company. The monologue she chose was from “Titus Andronicus”; she acted the part of a Roman general.

Pitman, who plays Powell at the U., said the experience showed her how often she goes through the world trying to show she’s polite and nonthreatening by talking in a higher octave, being indirect and pulling into her body. And she considers herself forthright and strong.

On stage, “having to take up space and stand tall with my head directly over my spine during confrontations for a full hour and a half is shockingly hard.”

Now, every time she wants to slouch, she questions: Is it because her back hurts, or to make someone else comfortable? When she’s being direct, she wonders: Would it feel rude if she were a man?

Morgan Werder, who plays Dunn in the U. production, said she learned there are no physical rules to gender. A man can swing his hips. A woman can walk with purpose. While playing Dunn has reminded her to spread out when she wants, she said she’s embraced her “femininity” as well.

“It’s just up to me on how I want to take up space in this world on a day-to-day basis. … Masculinity and femininity exist in everyone and it’s just about what we choose to present to the world,” she said.

The beauty of the play, she said, is when gender disappears.

“You just get caught up in the adventure and excitement and the missteps” of the characters. “You’re going to see women on a stage, but you get invested in who they are as people, rather than what they’ve got between their legs."

I have always loved babies. The smell of them, the joy in their eyes as they soak in the whole world, their fuzzy hair against my cheek. Amongst my friends, I was known as the baby whisperer. I taught my new mom friends the “pooping position” and the “sitting-up burp.” I couldn’t wait to be a mom.

Finally, at age 36, it was my turn.

We followed our baby’s growth each week. I dreamed of my little girl running around my childhood home in Idaho, jumping on the trampoline, digging potatoes with Grandpa, and baking in the kitchen with Grandma. We imagined the adventures we’d take to visit my husband’s family in Norway. In our minds, we created a whole life for her and us.

At our 16-week appointment, my husband and I were so excited to see her little heartbeat on the monitor. We listened as the technician measured the size of this and the length of that. I watched her unease creep into the room. Finally, she stopped and said the doctor would come in with a diagnosis.

Diagnosis?

A doctor we’d never met came in, sat, and rolled her chair up to us. She spoke softly. Our baby was missing an arm bone, the ulna. She was measuring very small, too small. Her lungs would not grow large enough. We sat silently waiting for more information, trying to fathom what she was getting at. Confused, I asked her to write it down.

She wrote thanatophoric dysplasia on a small slip of paper and handed it to me. Then she said it — our baby was “incompatible with life.”

I was too shocked to cry, too stunned to understand. We held each other’s hands tightly, and I stared at the floor all the way home. We researched those foreign words as soon as we walked in the door.

We found no comfort. Until then, we had been grasping at hope. If our baby even lived to term, she would live in uncontrollable pain, and she’d never breathe on her own. We looked at each other, and we knew.

We had to protect her from life.

At 18 weeks pregnant, I had an abortion.

The grief was like a brick; it crushed my chest. I couldn’t sleep. I lived in a fog.

I never imagined that I would have an abortion. It was inconceivable to me. I wanted a baby so badly. Until this happened, I had no idea what could possibly go wrong. And suddenly, it was happening to me.

I have learned so much from this devastating experience. I have come to understand my incredible privilege. I had a support system and financial security. I had access to the medical care I needed. It was enough to live this, let alone face artificial barriers.

My hope is that if you’ve lived through this experience, you will be comforted to know you are not alone. I write this in solidarity with all women; those who have suffered heart-wrenching loss, those who have chosen abortion, and especially, those who aren’t able to make the choice I did.

I implore our legislators to trust women and stop putting harmful restrictions on our access to health care. We can make the right choice for us and our families.

Jocelyn Crapo, Salt Lake City, is the mama to two rainbow babies who bring her endless joy. She grew up in southeastern Idaho on a potato farm and made her way to New York City, where she lived for 17 years working in design and fashion. She recently moved back west to Salt Lake City to be closer to family and the mountains.

Dear Ann Cannon • In our increasingly digital world, a lot of important facets of day-to-day life have moved online. Social media has become the primary means of connecting and networking, both personally and professionally, for so many people (especially millennials and the millennial-adjacent) that those who avoid the online water-cooler are put at a competitive disadvantage. Likewise, the shuttering of printed news outfits across the country has meant that to be a fully informed citizen on local, national and world issues and events requires time online. Text, email and different instant messaging platforms have become the primary methods of communication, and streaming services have become a major source of entertainment. For better and for worse, the practical reality of our modern lives involves some form of online engagement.

But that comes with certain perils.

The sheer volume of content and advertising pouring over our minds online can feel like a form of digital waterboarding, making the experience difficult to manage. Parsing truth from misinformation can seem like an overwhelming task, and the interpersonal conflicts can be emotionally exhausting and even toxic. The state of things doesn’t seem likely to improve, and if anything, with another presidential election on the horizon, seems likely to only get worse. So given that many of us feel (often correctly) that we need to be online, and given the personal toll that being online takes from us, how can we best negotiate that experience?

— Bewildered

Dear Bewildered • Thank you for this extremely articulate, thought-provoking look at “online engagement.” You’re right. It’s here to stay. And you’re right again. The amount of information and (misinformation) we’re currently called upon to manage is overwhelming. You also allude to the personal cost associated with living online. How many relationships have been damaged because people feel distressingly free to lob verbal grenades at one another in a way they never would in a face-to-face conversation? For me, there’s also the issue of time and how much of it I’ve squandered, going down one internet rabbit hole after another. Ugh. How best, then, to negotiate the online experience?

1. Think about eliminating one or more social media platforms from your life. Facebook. Twitter. Instagram. Snapchat. Do we really need to sign up for <i>everything? </i>All that stuff requires a lot of babysitting.
2. Try setting time limits for yourself one way or another. I KNOW! HARD! But still worth a try.
3. Notice when and <i>why </i>you’re getting online. Are you bored? Seeking diversion? Avoiding a real-time task that’s hard to complete? Then ask yourself if getting online in that moment is really worth it. What will you gain from the experience? What will you lose?
4. Turn off your smartphone. Leave it at home, even. If you’re of a certain generation, you spent a lot of your life without one. Remind yourself you can still survive without it.
5. When you <i>do </i>get online, be mindful of what you’re actually consuming in terms of information. If everything you read validates your point of view, you’re being manipulated at some level. This doesn’t mean you have to go searching for other points of view, necessarily. But you should be honest enough to acknowledge that you’re not getting the full picture. About anything.
6. It’s probably a good idea to also acknowledge that by limiting your digital footprint, you might not be able to fully engage in the cyber water-cooler conversations you reference. But so what?
7. Finally (and most importantly!), do not confuse online social interaction with true face-to-face social interaction. In a TED talk titled <a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/susan_pinker_the_secret_to_living_longer_may_be_your_social_life?language=en" target=_blank>“The Secret to Living Longer May be Your Social Life,”</a> developmental psychologist Susan Pinker shares research suggesting that the single most important predictor of longevity is the number of face-to-face interactions you have as you pass through your day. Friends. Family members. The mail carrier. The barista at the coffee shop. All of these contacts are good for you. So in other words?

Get up.

And get out.

Ann Cannon is The Tribune’s advice columnist. Got a question for Ann? Email her at askann@sltrib.com or visit the Ask Ann Cannon page on Facebook.

George H.W. Bush did it.

So did Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford and Herbert Hoover. It probably wasn't easy, yet they knew this was what the moment demanded and democracy required. So each of them took that ceremonial ride to the Capitol with the man who had defeated them, and then sat there politely as he took power that had been theirs.

Which brings us to Donald Trump. Can anyone, even in their most fanciful imaginings, see him doing that?

Michael Cohen can't. "Given my experience working for Mr. Trump," Trump's former fixer, lawyer and toady told the House Oversight Committee Wednesday, "I fear that if he loses the election in 2020, there will never be a peaceful transition of power."

Let that marinate a moment. And ask yourself: What happens if this guy whose self-definition, whose entire psychological structure, is founded upon a self-image as a man who always wins, loses? Can you see him quietly accepting it with dignity and grace?

One can more readily imagine Mitch McConnell twerking in Times Square.

And if Trump does refuse to accept the verdict of the electorate, what do the people who have followed him slavishly, renouncing common sense, simple decency and the evidence of their own eyes, do then? Will they reject the legitimacy of the new president? Will violence follow?

You may think the entire scenario far-fetched. But in the Trump age, that term hardly has meaning anymore. Indeed, it is a measure of how extraordinary this era is that this fear, expressed by a man who knows Trump better than almost anyone, was not the top takeaway from the hearing.

No, most of the chatter has had to do with whether Trump is, as Cohen painted him, a racist, a liar, a con man, and a crook — all important things to know. But surely it is just as important to ponder whether the racist, liar, con man and crook is also a threat.

One wonders if, in largely failing to grapple that question, news media and the electorate are not, yet again, failing to appreciate what an outlier Trump is. It's worth remembering how some of us spent the first six months of his term waiting for him to turn some metaphorical corner and "become presidential." That never happened, and the people who thought it would seem silly in retrospect. They underestimated his willingness and capacity to explode our every expectation and sacred norm.

And they may once again be making that same mistake. John Dean, you will recall, famously warned Richard Nixon of a "cancer" on the presidency. But in 2019, the cancer is the presidency. So there is a need for us to be clear-eyed and sober about what we face. I don't know that we're there yet.

In the impassioned soliloquy with which he closed the hearing, committee chair Elijah Cummings spoke of the need for America to get "back to normal." In those words, there was a probably unintended echo of Lincoln, early in the Civil War, yearning to restore the Union. But what Lincoln later came to realize is that the Union had been so profoundly sundered it could never be returned to what it had been.

The same seems true of us now. "Normal" is gone. If America is to survive this cancer intact, it will have to embrace what Lincoln famously called "a new birth of freedom." In other words, we will have to cobble together a different America — one hopes, a better America — from the broken shards of what used to be.

As the election of 2020 bears down, our ability and willingness to do that is the one great hope this country still has.

With any luck, it will be the only one we need.

Leonard Pitts is a columnist for The Miami Herald. lpitts@miamiherald.com

Here in Utah, we believe in the importance of happy, healthy families. It’s probably the one thing that everyone can agree on.

At Planned Parenthood, we believe that one of the best ways to ensure a happy, healthy family is having access to high-quality, affordable family planning services. We know that when families start with healthy parents who are able to time their pregnancies, outcomes are better for everyone. And that’s why Title X, the nation’s program for affordable birth control and reproductive health care, was created.

This program, which 37,000 Utahns and four million people nationwide rely on each year, is meant to ensure that every person — regardless of where they live, their background, or whether or not they have health insurance — has access to basic, preventive reproductive health care, such as birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and regular check-ups.

Title X is at risk. On Monday, the Trump-Pence administration will officially publish its gag rule — drastically changing the program’s original intent.

Specifically, the Trump gag rule does three things:

1) Impose new restrictions designed to make it impossible for millions of patients to get birth control or health care from Planned Parenthood and other safety net health clinics;

2) Ban doctors and nurses in the Title X program from referring their patients or acknowledging the availability of safe, legal abortion;

3) Remove the guarantee that patients get full and accurate comprehensive information about their birth control and preventive care options from their doctor.

These changes are not only a radical departure from the way health care has operated in the United States, they completely undermine the important and essential Title X program.

Since its inception, Planned Parenthood has been the steward of Title X funding and the leading provider of affordable reproductive health care for low-income families across the state. We take that responsibility seriously. Planned Parenthood of Utah is one of the most effective grantees — providing care at the lowest cost per patient in the region. For every dollar spent on family planning services, $7.09 is saved in the health care system. We are the experts in reproductive health care, serving over 47,000 patients last year and conducting research, utilizing technology and investing in our provider network to make sure our patients get the highest quality, most effective comprehensive care possible. In 45 years of independent audits, not one dollar of Title X money has been spent on abortion.

Without Planned Parenthood, uninsured and underinsured patients in Utah would have nowhere else to go to access these lifesaving services. Proponents of “defunding” Planned Parenthood through this rule, who believe that other providers can merely pick up our patients, are painfully naïve. The gag rule excludes other qualified providers in Utah as well.

It’s clear that the Trump-Pence administration wants to punish Planned Parenthood, but they would actually hurt the patients that need us – those who wouldn’t be able to afford or access health care any other way.

My experience is that Utahns approve of the Title X program and believe that everyone should have access to the care they need to live their best life and have a healthy family. Title X was carefully constructed through the bipartisan work of Congress in the 1970s to support that very idea. Yet the current administration would like to unravel the legacy of the national family planning program to score political points at the expense of those most vulnerable in our community.

Playing politics with our health is unacceptable. We will continue to fight this rule via every avenue. At Planned Parenthood, our patients come first and our doors stay open—no matter what.

Karrie Galloway is the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Association of Utah. She lives in Salt Lake City.

“Free Solo” scared the crap out of me. I can’t think of any other movie that frightened me more than this one, which won an Oscar a week ago and airs — commercial-free — on the National Geographic Channel on Sunday at 7 p.m.

I’m a complete coward when it comes to horror films, though I can at least tell myself that horror films aren’t real. “Free Solo,” on the other hand, was all too real to someone like me, who is terrified of heights. It chronicles Alex Honnald’s June 3, 2017, ascent of El Capitan, the sheer rock formation at Yosemite National Park in California.

“Free Solo” means climbing without ropes or any other device. Just Honnald using his hands and feet to climb nearly 3,000 feet.

If he’d slipped at 100 feet, he’d be dead. If he’d slipped at 2,900 feet, he’d really be dead. It’s horrifying.

Yes, I know he made it. Honnold recently appeared before TV critics to talk about the film, which won the Academy Award as outstanding documentary for filmmakers Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi and Jimmy Chin.

“Free Solo” isn’t just about the climb, it’s about Honnold. And he’s … unusual. Determined. Focused. A brilliant climber. But awkward. Largely lacking in people skills. And he’s in the midst of a new and serious romance with his girlfriend, Sanni McCandless, who features prominently in the film.

“It’s not just a fairy tale romance, it has really real moments where there are high highs, and low lows, and hard conversations,” McCandless told TV critics. “And I think people relate to that.”

A lot of people who know a whole lot more about rock climbing than I do thought that free climbing on El Capitan was crazy. “People who really know exactly what he’s doing are freaked out,” a fellow climber says in the film.

It was incredibly stressful on those involved in making the documentary — including the camera operators who climbed El Capitan (using ropes) and positioned themselves to capture Honnold’s climb.

“If you watch the whole film, I think it’s pretty obvious,” said cinematographer Mikey Schaefer. “You know, the emotional toll it took on me. ... It was really hard on me. I mean, just being so close to a good friend of yours and knowing that, oh, well, he could perish in front of your eyes.

“It was probably harder on us than it was on him in that regard.”

And Honnold agreed.

“Typically, watching free soloing is much more stressful than actually doing it,” he said. “Because when you do it, you know how prepared you are and you know how comfortable you are. But when you’re watching it, there’s no sense of control and you’re just hoping for the best. And, I mean, obviously it’s super stressful.”

This is actual life-or-death drama.

“I thought through all the consequences and I imagined what it would be like to fall off in different places and what would happen,” Honnold said. “I think in a lot of ways that’s a healthy relationship with mortality because it’s just an acceptance that we’re all going to die at some point. And I would like to die on my own terms, doing the things that I care about in the way that I care about them.”

The filmmakers also thought about what they’d do if he fell to his death while their cameras were rolling.

“We were trying not to think about that too much, and we would have reconsidered if something bad had happened,” said Bob Eisenhardt, who edited the film. “But I think to honor Alex, we would have tried to make the film.”

Yikes.

“Free Solo” is an amazing documentary. Vasarhelyi, Chin and their team did a magnificent job of capturing both Honnold and his amazing accomplishment.

There were moments when I averted my eyes in terror. But I couldn’t look away. You may not be able to, either.

How do you get from Salt Lake County’s fast-growing southwestern cities to other parts of the valley?

Patiently.

Area roads, many designed when these towns were quiet bedroom communities, are frequently crammed, particularly during commuting times. And new homes, apartments and town houses are going up at a swift pace in that neck of the county.

Frustrated mayors say their cities are growing so rapidly that road improvements aren’t keeping up, and they are imploring state officials to make transportation spending in the region a high priority.

The suburban cities of Herriman, South Jordan, West Jordan, Bluffdale, Riverton and Copperton have added more than 160,000 residents since 2000, their mayors say, and that wave has brought a flurry of housing development, much of it multifamily.

And although these cities have taken in roughly 70 percent of the county’s population increase over the past two decades, their mayors contend the state is behind on millions of dollars in upgrades to roads, interchanges and mass transit in their areas.

The combined trends have left many key east-west arterials such as 12600 South and 13400 South at failure rates, meaning that commuter traffic grinds to a standstill on a near-daily basis. At the same time, bus and train services are significantly lacking across the region, which, because it has nearly half of the county’s remaining undeveloped land, will only get more crowded.

“Ask any resident in the area, or drive through the quadrant during peak hours, and you will hear about the infrastructure challenge to keep up with our rapid expansion,” the six mayors wrote in a jointly signed op-ed, published Sunday in The Salt Lake Tribune.

The problem is apparent just from the region’s geography, Riverton Mayor Trent Staggs said in an interview. Wasatch Boulevard on the county’s east side, for example, is six miles from Interstate 15. Western portions of Herriman, South Jordan and West Jordan, meanwhile, are 12 miles from I-15.

“We've got no interstate connectivity and we've got no east-west connector and our traffic counts have just gotten progressively worse,” Staggs told The Tribune, adding that state road spending “is more than 10 years behind the curve when it comes to the southwest part of the valley.”

He and other mayors are pushing for, among other things, funding to finish the Mountain View Corridor and convert Bangerter Highway into a full freeway — projects that between them represent more than $1 billion in state spending.

“You’ve got to look at where the growth is occurring,” Staggs said. “And let’s not treat areas disparately, because in the southwest, it feels like we have been.”

‘Victims of success’

The opinion piece — signed by Staggs and fellow Mayors Jim Riding of West Jordan; Dawn Ramsey of South Jordan; Derk Timothy of Bluffdale; Sean Clayton of the metro township of Copperton; and Herriman Mayor Pro Tempore Jared Henderson — comes amid other signs of frustration among elected leaders in that part of Salt Lake County, including talk of creating their own county.

Utah Department of Transportation officials say that the agency isn’t shortchanging that part of the valley, but instead prioritizes road spending statewide based on need — in a process designed to be apolitical.

UDOT spokesman John Gleason said Bangerter Highway remains one of the most heavily traveled roads on the valley’s west side. And after recently completing a series of freeway-style interchanges, the agency continues to make that stretch a priority, he said, as it is with the Mountain View Corridor. Gleason also noted a recent widening to three lanes of 10600 South from I-15 to Redwood Road, as well as other work serving the area.

“It feels like I'm always talking about projects that we're doing in the southwestern part of Salt Lake County,” Gleason said.

But Staggs said that road spending decisions statewide seem designed to spread funds evenly among UDOT’s four regions, instead of adequately targeting areas of rapid growth.

State officials have fueled the wider problem, Staggs and West Jordan’s Riding added, with economic development incentives that have lured thousands of new, often high-paying jobs to Utah, many of them along the highway corridor linking southern Salt Lake and northern Utah counties, known as Silicon Slopes.

“We’ve been a victim of our own success,” Staggs said.

Tax incentives offered to businesses through the years by the Governor’s Office of Economic Development have centered on bringing people and industries to Utah, Riding said, “but they don’t seem too worried about moving them around."

Val Hale, executive director of GOED, said those economic development efforts had succeeded in bringing high-paying employment to Utah and diversifying its economy, making it “the envy of the nation.” But Hale acknowledged that resulting growth has begun to create significant issues in both affordable housing and transportation.

“It’s starting to get more expensive and more challenging for people, no doubt about it,” Hale said. “I commute every day from Orem to Salt Lake so I know firsthand what that’s like.

“We definitely have to try to stay ahead of it,” he said, “and that requires some very diligent and thoughtful planning to do that.”

More housing?

The mayors’ public statement on roads also comes as lawmakers on Utah’s Capitol Hill consider new steps nudging cities to plan for more affordable housing.

The Legislature is advancing a bill that would use state transportation money as a way to require cities to adopt strategies that encourage construction of affordable housing.

SB34 — considered one of the hallmark bills of the 2019 legislative session — would penalize cities that don’t take up at least three of 21 recommended housing strategies by making them ineligible for future state transportation investment money.

That bill remained in the House Rules Committee as of Friday, sidetracked for now because it would provide $20 million in one-time money and $4 million yearly after that to the state’s Olene Walker Housing Loan Trust Fund. It is expected to move to the House floor as the state’s latest budget numbers come into better focus.

And while southwest Salt Lake Valley cities are all probably meeting SB34’s housing requirements already, Staggs questioned the bill’s approach in light of his city’s existing transportation needs.

“Why would you put that cart before the horse?” the Riverton mayor asked. “Then if we don't add to our cart the way they want, they’ll take our horse?”

Sen. Jake Anderegg, R-Lehi, the sponsor of SB34, said he was sympathetic to the mayors’ concerns over road spending added that his bill would not harm them.

“If they're saying we need more attention for transportation, I agree 100 percent,” said Anderegg, “but that is not what this bill is.”

SB34, the product of work by a 20-member commission created last year, is designed to give cities a lot of flexibility, the lawmaker said — and to more closely coordinate future state road spending with city land-use planning and growth.

‘Critical step’

The mayors’ public call for help also comes amid other signs of frustrations shared by city officials in southwest Salt Lake County.

Staggs said in an interview the opinion piece grew out of a dialogue among southwest valley mayors as they have met regularly since last summer’s controversy over the proposed Olympia Hills development west of Herriman.

“We share so many similar demographics," Staggs said, “and that growth pattern, as it fills out the county, is largely going our way.”

Though initially approved by Salt Lake County, the high-density, 9,000-residential unit Olympic Hills project was ultimately vetoed by then-County Mayor Ben McAdams in the face of opposition from area mayors and thousands of residents, mostly over traffic concerns.

Staggs said southwest cities are unfairly perceived as resisting higher-density housing, when, in fact, they’ve allowed thousands of multifamily dwellings in recent years and thousands more are in the pipeline. Denser housing now represents between 30 percent and 40 percent of all housing stock in their communities, the mayors wrote, a ratio on par or higher than other areas of the county.

“People and even legislators and folks with the county I speak with sometimes think that Bluffdale, Herriman and parts of Riverton are made up of these sprawling acre-plus lots with horses,” Staggs said. “That is not the case. They just don’t know what we’ve done.”

There are indications, too, that Riverton and adjacent communities have begun to strike out on their own on key issues.

Leaders in Herriman, Riverton, West Jordan and Copperton also recently voiced support for a bill that would essentially let communities break away and create their own county without needing support from the county they are leaving.

And while they’re not saying they’re likely to secede, several city officials from the area have said that HB39, sponsored by Rep. Kim Coleman, R-West Jordan, could give them leverage with county officials in some long-standing disputes, including over transportation spending.

In their op-ed, the mayors also announced they are amassing $250,000 to pay for a first-ever joint regional planning effort, designed to create a vision for integrating the six cities’ roadways and transit systems. Salt Lake County has already put $100,000 toward the study, and the cities have contributed $25,000 among them while they seek a grant to pay for the rest of it.

“This is a critical step,” the mayors wrote of their planning effort.

And, for commuters’ sake, they are asking the state to do more to ease that bumper-to-bumper traffic they face almost daily.

The young waterfront instructor tilted her head as she held out her hand. “You can do it,” she said, calmly.

Cautiously, I stepped on to the stand-up paddleboard for the first time, and quickly knelt for stability. The stakes were high: Even in August, the icy mountain lake at Camp Cloud Rim would mean a painful dunk for any mistake.

As I glided away, I gained balance and soon mastered moving from kneeling to standing, confident to try something new, even as a grandmother. Growing bold, I shouted encouragement and a challenge to my friend also paddling across the pristine lake.

It’s a great example of Girl Scouting – a safe place to try out new adventures, conquer fears, share excitement with friends, and choose your own path.

Girl Scouts of Utah is the premier organization for girls in Utah. “For girls” means that the program is specially designed to develop girls as go-getters, innovators, risk-takers and leaders. It is a modern, well-researched and time-tested set of programs that are guided by a trained volunteer who can offer the social capital that many girls in our state need. Girl Scout troops are girl-led. The girls decide what activities they want to do. Girl Scout troops provide a place where gender stereotypes of what a girl can do are thankfully set aside: Girls can do anything.

In Utah, we offer some of the nation’s most challenging outdoor adventures: rock climbing, camping, white water rafting, hiking, sailing and many other trips and camp activities. Just last week, Girl Scouts participated in extreme winter camping, where they snowshoed, built snow caves and camped in the snow. Girls also work with our partners to learn financial literacy, STEM, business skills, coding, design and even what it means to be a first responder.

The Girl Scout Cookie Program is the largest girl-led entrepreneurial program in the world, where girls can build a business, create relationships, interact with customers, manage money and set goals. All of the net revenue raised through the program stays here in Utah and with the girls and troops. Girls set goals and use cookie funds to pay their own way to camp, troop activities and travel. Local communities also benefit, as many girls use their money to fund improvement projects, or donate to worthy causes.

Girl Scouts have a proven record. The top women leaders in the country — senators, business leaders, astronauts, athletes, military officers and engineers — were overwhelmingly Girl Scouts. Our Gold Award Girl Scouts create and implement sustainable projects that engage serious issues like homelessness, health, literacy, global warming, youth suicide, drug abuse and clean water. The Gold Award, similar to an Eagle, is challenging and inspires girls to take action.

Many people ask us about Boy Scouts’ new policy to allow girls. Boy Scouts is an historic and important organization, but I know many former Boy Scouts and leaders who question the appropriateness of the recent change. It isn’t clear whether this is a benefit for boys or girls.

Studies show that girls learn better in an all-girl, girl-led and girl-friendly environment. In Girl Scouts she can be herself, lead, try new things, and even fall into the icy lake, learning to get up, dry off and try again. In a world literally dominated by boy’s clubs, girls really need at least one place of their own.

Girl Scouts today support girls who will lead in a modern, diverse and changing world. We are looking for adult volunteers, new troops and donors to support refugee troops and others who need a little help.

Brenda Case Scheer is a Lifetime Girl Scout, a professor in the School of Architecture and City and Metropolitan Planning at the University of Utah and board chair of the Girl Scouts of Utah.

Thank you so much for juxtaposing Rep. Chris Stewart’s and Tom Huckin’s opinion pieces on socialism in the Feb. 26 edition.

Both articles were enlightening: Stewart’s piece for how shallow our federal representatives think and write, and Huckin’s for pointing out what so many people seem oblivious to: We all live in public spaces, supported by one another’s tax dollars.

My question to Stewart is: How will your new Anti-Socialism Caucus be paid for? Will you be using your own private resources, or will you be using tax dollars to “educate” the American people on the evils of socialism?

Allan Ainsworth, Park City

Submit a letter to the editor

In recent days, opposition has been leveled against Senate Bill 132, a bill that would raise the percentage of alcohol in beer from 3.2 to 4.8.

It’s absolutely vital to pass this legislation and bring Utah in line with the rest of the country. 3.2 beer is a thing of the past, which is already making it very difficult for grocery and convenience stores to get an adequate beer supply.

I don’t drink, but I firmly believe in free agency. People should be allowed to make decisions and choose their own path. It’s up to those who drink, not the government, to make sure they are doing so in a responsible manner. We are a free society and out-of-touch attempts to legislate morality via message bills or keeping old relics like 3.2 beer rob all individuals of their agency. This must stop.

We risk being the only state still offering 3.2 beer. Utah prides itself on a being a pro-business state and, as such, there are times when changes have to be made to maintain economic competitiveness. This is one of those times.

Ryan D. Curtis, Salt Lake City

Submit a letter to the editor

The Emery County Wilderness Bill is the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the people of Utah. It shows that all of Utah's congressional delegation, with the exception of Sen. Mike Lee, are a bunch of RINOs.

How can giving up 600,000 acres of our public lands to the federal government be a benefit to our people? The whole thing is illegal, as it discriminates against our most vulnerable people — the aged and disabled — as they will no longer be able access these public lands. The entirety of reporting on this issue is nothing but propaganda because this critical aspect was never reported.

The fact that this federal land grab was endorsed by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance prima facie evidence that it is poison for people of Utah.

And shame on Gov. Gary Herbert for selling us out. He should have known better.

Rainer Huck, Salt Lake City

Submit a letter to the editor

Regarding the Feb. 26 article, “Legislators tell cities to go easy on plastic bags,” here is an open letter to Rep. Mike McKell regarding his HB320 and the need for a substitute bill.

Dear Rep. McKell,

Every municipality has the right of self-determination when it comes to enacting rules and regulations to protect and improve the health of its citizens and the environment in which its citizens reside and on which their well-being depends.

That includes, but is not limited to, the banning of products and activities it deems harmful to the health and well-being of its citizens, products such as single-use disposable items that contribute significantly to unsightly litter pollution.

And, in a substitute bill, I suggest you add language so that the state of Utah shall make no law or provision to prohibit municipalities from establishing rules and regulations that they deem appropriate to protect the health and welfare of its citizens including limiting the use and availability of single-use disposable items.

James Westwater, Spanish Fork

Submit a letter to the editor

For the past six years, my wife and I have enjoyed the fun of driving an electric car, a Nissan Leaf. It is so peppy and responsive, it makes driving a joy.

Last year we purchased our second electric car, a Chevrolet Bolt. The Bolt has a range of 220 miles on a single charge, which means that my wife can easily commute from Provo to her job in Salt Lake City. Two of our daughters are also driving electric and loving it.

With solar panels on our roof, charging our cars is free and sun-powered. Zero pollution, no oil changes, no monthly service charges, no filling up at expensive gasoline stations, no oil stains on our driveway. Our dealer says we are not producing about 1,000 pounds of CO2 each month.

With Audi, Hyundai, Volkswagen, Ford and Tesla all producing electric vehicles, and used electrics becoming available, everyone can afford an electric. With a federal tax credit of up to $7,500 currently available, and the state government promising more charging stations, now is the time to join the electric revolution.

If you hate the inversion, buy and drive an electric car. It’s fun!

Peter Livingston Myer, Provo

Submit a letter to the editor

A Utah lawmaker set a goal to remove any incentive any Utah police officer could have to unnecessarily take money from someone.

State law allows officers to seize property — even from people who are never charged, let alone convicted of a crime — under a process called civil asset forfeiture.

Concerned about the potential for abuse, Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, had hoped SB109 would put more safeguards in place.

But even the insinuation that an officer would improperly seize cash or items from a suspect brought a big backlash from Utah’s police agencies, where leaders argue the tool, used largely against drug dealers, is not abused.

At the end of the day, Utah’s laws aren’t going to change — at least not this year.

Yet, the public policy debate isn’t going away.

‘It’s highway robbery’

Police in Utah have taken millions of dollars in recent years under a law that allows officers to seize property and cash if they believe it is connected to criminal activity. In 2016, police seized $1.6 million in cash and property. In 2017, the last full year of data, police seized $2.5 million.

And officers don’t need to get a conviction to keep it — though the most recent state data shows 87 percent of the time, prosecutors do at least file criminal charges.

So far this year, police departments have filed court documents detailing 30 asset forfeiture cases, all in connection to suspected drug activity.

The smallest sum of money was $201, taken from a man stopped by a police officer for riding his bicycle at night without proper lighting. He had warrants for his arrest, so an officer searched him and found a few dozen prescription pills and six grams of methamphetamine. Officers took the man’s money, claiming in court papers that it was “believed to have facilitated the illegal possession or distribution of a controlled substance.”

The man has filed a handwritten response in court, saying the money had been withdrawn from his bank account a day earlier and was “legal and legitimate” income.

The biggest recent seizure was more than $90,000 that a Tooele officer took after pulling over a driver for a traffic infraction. A police dog “indicated” an odor of drugs in the vehicle. Police found no drugs — but did find bundles of cash.

The traffic stop happened more than four months ago, but prosecutors have never filed criminal charges against him. That motorist hired an attorney, Jim Bradshaw, to fight to get his money back. Bradshaw has argued in court papers that his client is an “innocent owner” whose rights were violated.

The Salt Lake City attorney said this man’s case was similar to many of his other clients: Out-of-state drivers who are pulled over for traffic infractions and are found to have large amounts of money — but no drugs — in their cars.

Bradshaw said there’s lots of reasons for people to be carrying large amounts of money, such as having cash to invest in a business or a restaurant. And sure, he said, there may be times when someone is driving to go buy marijuana.

But police aren’t supposed to just take the money, Bradshaw said. They’re supposed to be able to show how it is tied to some sort of crime. He argues that doesn’t always happen.

“It’s highway robbery,” he said. “It is. There are certain places on the road where you’re likely to get pulled over if you’re driving an out-of-state car, particularly a rental car.”

Critics, like Bradshaw, are concerned that Utah’s asset forfeiture law may allow police to seize items from innocent people who don’t have the resources to fight the government to get their property back. And some say Weiler’s bill would only have been a small step toward their goal of requiring a criminal conviction before police can keep the cash or property.

‘We as a state are being laughed at by cartels’

Police agencies that seize property are required to deposit cash or profits into a state account that doles out grants to law enforcement agencies.

But the rules are different in federal court. So if a Utah police agency brings a civil asset case there, the federal government gets a portion of the funds and the rest is given directly to the police agency that seized it.

Weiler’s bill would have done two things, both actions he said would help ensure police in Utah aren’t given extra incentives to take people’s property.

The first clarified in the state law that an agency can apply for those grants, even if the agency did not seize property from anyone that year. Currently, only agencies that seized assets can apply for the funds.

“That has a pay-to-play feel to it,” Weiler said.

The bill also would have required police to ask a state court judge for permission to move an asset forfeiture case to the federal system. This potential change was prompted by a Utah Supreme Court ruling where there was a question about whether the federal court can have jurisdiction over $500,000 seized by the Utah Highway Patrol during a 2016 traffic stop. The motorist in that case, Kyle Savely, had his money returned to him after the high court ruled in his favor.

But at a legislative committee hearing Friday, law enforcement officials came out in force to testify against Weiler’s bill. They called the accusation that there was a “pay-to-play” system in Utah offensive to their profession and a myth.

“It does not exist,” Ogden Police Chief Randy Watt said.

Most of the officers’ testimony was not specific to the changes that Weiler was proposing, but broadly defended the validity of asset forfeiture laws.

They said stripping criminals of money earned from drug-dealing or other crimes is important to stymie illegal activity. And the funding they receive from seizing that money, they say, is critical for task forces that target drug crimes.

Without that money, they say, officers won’t be able to work their cases as effectively.

Several police officers said Utah’s asset forfeiture laws are already lax — and coupled with criminal justice reforms in recent years, it’s made the state a more enticing place for big drug dealers to set up shop.

“We as a state are being laughed at by cartels,” said Orem Lt. BJ Robinson. “We hear them talking about it on our wires. We hear them talking about it in interviews. We hear it from confidential informants.”

And many of the officers said it’s only criminals who are being targeted by these practices, not innocent people.

“I’m concerned about the trajectory of where we are going,” said Brian Besser, assistant special agent in charge of Utah’s Drug Enforcement Administration office. “If we are seeking to incentivize criminals, then pass this bill.”

The House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee on Friday decided not to do that. But it didn’t reject the bill either. Instead, it opted to send the bill for further study over the next year — a move that was disappointing to Weiler and those advocating for change.

Connor Boyack, president of Libertas Institute, a libertarian think tank, said he felt the police’s opposition was based on “hysteria and drama.”

He said Weiler’s bill tried to update the laws to match the Utah Supreme Court ruling, and pointed to another recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that was critical of asset forfeiture practices.

Boyack promised that Friday’s vote wasn’t the end of this debate. More reform efforts, he said, will be coming.

“Law enforcement is on the losing side,” he said. “It is very clear where the momentum is headed.”

What are the issues that make Utah voters decide whom they are going to vote for? What you are about to read will not surprise Utah politicians. But it does not conform to what is published in the Utah media.

The Utah Foundation published its list of the top 10 issues for 2016. Health care, air quality, public education and taxes topped the list. Yet, in 2016 and 2018 and for almost as long as I can remember, the voters voted on none of these issues. If they had, Utah would have a much different government than currently exists.

This does not necessarily mean voters lie to pollsters, but rather pollsters may not ask the right questions.

I would like to suggest that the two major issues for Utah voters are: 1) party; and 2) religion. After that, there is basically no other issue that matters, although almost synonymous with these two issues are abortion rights and gay marriage. And party and religion are closely linked, especially in the Republican Party.

Utah is one of a handful of states that permit straight party voting. This gives both parties a built-in advantage, but because there are so many more Republicans than Democrats in Utah, Republicans are greatly more advantaged. For this reason attempts in the legislature to change it have died in committee. In the most recent statistics available, of the approximately 1.5 million voters in Utah, Democrats totaled 185,000, Republicans 681,000 and Unaffiliated 509,000. Although exact statistics on how unaffiliated voters vote in general elections are unavailable, the results in partisan elections would indicate that a sizeable majority of them vote for Republican candidates. It is my view that many of not most unaffiliated voters choose to be unaffiliated it somehow seems more virtuous to them to say they vote for the person instead of the party. But in many, if not most cases I believe they do not take the time and effort to study the positions of the candidates they vote for, hence, they are "partisans in disguise."

In virtually all Republican races, religion and party are inseparable. With one exception, every Republican legislator is also LDS. Democrats in the Legislature are evenly split between LDS and non-LDS.

Several years ago, The Salt Lake Tribune published the voter registration of the top 15 general authorities in the LDS Church. Eleven of them were Republicans and the other four were unaffiliated. Not a single Democrat to be found.

Mormons know this, and so they feel that the Republican Party is the “Only True Party.” Official church statements of political neutrality, they appear to feel, are wink-wink, nudge-nudge political cover to ensure the church’s non-profit status. The pronouncement thus becomes “Do as I say, not do as I do.”

The one exception to the afore stated rule is Senate District 18, where non-Mormon Ann Milner was elected in 2014 and re-elected in 2018. Milner is the former president of Weber State University. This poses and interesting question, because her predecessor at WSU, Harvard-educated Paul Thompson was called to be an LDS mission president soon after leaving WSU. Returning to Utah after his mission, Thompson ran for the Legislature as a Democrat in Utah County and was defeated. This is evidence that party trumps religion among Utah Republicans.

The bottom line, then, is that Republicans in the state Legislature care nothing for the issues voters tell pollsters. And even plebiscites such as recent propositions are swept aside, because the legislators know that as long as they have an R after their name on the ballot, they are assured of election.

The most graphic illustration of this was the 2007 referendum on school vouchers. By a 68 percent to 32 percent margin, voters rejected the voucher law passed by the Legislature. Yet not a single legislator who voted for vouchers was defeated in the following election. Even Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. who supported and signed the legislation left office unscathed and remains a symbol of Republican moderation.

Vance Pace, Kaysville, spent a 30-year career as a Foreign Service officer. He holds bachelors and masters degrees in political science from Utah State University.

On Feb. 2, a community forum was held in Salt Lake City to discuss implications of the Utah inland port. Experts, professionals and residents alike aired concerns about policymakers overlooking worsened air quality and the destruction of fragile ecosystems in the name of economic development. Spokespeople from Racially Just Utah also joined the dialogue to share ways in which the port continues to be a clear instance of environmental racism.

Environmental racism refers to any act that results in disproportionate effects of environmentally hazardous conditions on communities of color. The area approved for inland port construction will take place in the northwest quadrant of Utah, near the Great Salt Lake. The port site will envelop significant portions of Salt Lake County acreage — specifically sections of West Valley City and Magna.

Data from the U.S. Census shows that people of color make up about 21 percent of Utah’s population, and 27.9 percent of Salt Lake County’s population. In comparison, people of color make up 53.2 percent of West Valley City’s population and 36.4 percent of Magna’s population. As such, the placement of the port alone is an illustration of environmental racism. The implications of the port are even worse considering that residents of the area are already disproportionately burdened with pollution from refineries and traffic.

In addition, the establishment of inland port has lacked transparency and representation. Utah state Reps. Angela Romero and Sandra Hollins have expressed concern and frustration about the way in which Gov. Gary Herbert and other government officials have proceeded.

For the 79 percent of Utah residents that are white, this situation calls for allyship. White allyship requires continual self-awareness, responsibility and accountability. An important component of white allyship requires taking action to confront racial inequity on the local level. The inland port is a detrimental product of environmental racism that needs to be met with ownership. It should go without saying that economic development by means of racial injustice, increased pollution and environmental depletion is absolutely unacceptable.

So, what can you do?

To begin, reach out to your legislators in support of Senate Bill 144. This bill aims to achieve two main goals. First, it will set a baseline for air, water, light and noise pollution through the Department of Environmental Quality. Collecting baseline data will help accurately assess health impacts of the port. Second, SB144 proposes to create a solid infrastructure designed to monitor pollution levels.

The implementation of this bill is urgent, time-sensitive and absolutely crucial when working toward equitable public health. If we do not collect this baseline information now we will never be able to collect data on pre-construction pollution levels. Meaning the affected population will be denied hard evidence of any effects of the port.

Other points of action include closely following port construction updates, following the Coalition for Port Reform and attending City Council meetings and community forums. Support organizations led by people of color working on this issue such as Racially Just Utah. Be sure to speak up, share the information you learn with those around you, and encourage others to do the same.

Audrianna Dehlin, Salt Lake City, is a recent graduate of Utah State University with a bachelor’s degree in psychology, and a passion for academia, sustainability and advocacy.