Deseret News | Supreme Court sides with Draper, UTA on referendum

Reader comments
Supreme Court sides with Draper, UTA on referendum

No vote | 2:16 p.m. July 11, 2008

So the people of Draper have no vote. Perfect the UTA gets what they want and blocks anyone from voting against it. Sounds like America to me?.

Hoodwinked? | 2:15 p.m. July 11, 2008

Um, you haven't been hoodwinked when the Supreme Court says that's the law.

You bought homes with a railroad track right behind them and never thought a train would go down the track? Maybe you were hoodwinked by the realtor that sold you the place...

GeeBee | 2:36 p.m. July 11, 2008

I just have one thing to say to the elites in Draper...NEENER NEENER NEENER!!! See you on TRAX!

Comments continue below

Carmen | 2:39 p.m. July 11, 2008

I have lived in Draper since 1979 and it's been a 'black-hole' for public transportation. It's about time to get light-rail in our backyards. I can't wait!

jmdspk | 2:56 p.m. July 11, 2008

So nice to see NIMBYism loose to common sense. Most old time Draperites are happy to see TRAX comeing, it is only the New Draperites who think they are too good for transit trying to stop it.

To No Vote: Actually the citizens of the county voted for more TRAX lines so you had your vote. You voted for your city council members and mayor to make those kinds of decisions. If you don't the decisions they make run for office yourself.

John | 2:58 p.m. July 11, 2008

The people in Draper have been bent over time and time again. When I moved to Draper the city said they could would not build beyond the railroad tracks. People do not have a voice. How many times did the stadium in Sandy get voted on? The first time it failed. Why would you need another vote? The government will do what they want regardless. They will keep pushing until what they want happens. Up with hope down with government.CORRUPTION!

Elisha | 2:59 p.m. July 11, 2008

I for one am excited to get trax out here. As another commenter posted Draper is black-hole for transportation. Think of all the senior citizens in this area it's great for them. It also allows those who work in this area an alternative transportation option so we can all save gas help the environment, and eliminate congestion. WOOO HOOO Now we just need light rail out in West Jordan all the way to Bacchus Highway.

Great News! | 3:15 p.m. July 11, 2008

The UTA's plan for public transportation has made Salt Lake City a shining example for other cities. It's a good thing that they won't let a few elitists in Draper stand in their way. While they can afford their big SUV's they would want to deny others the option of good public transportation.

Good decision | 3:16 p.m. July 11, 2008

I agree that Trax and bus service sorely needs extension into the south of the valley, including Draper, West and South Jordan, Riverton and Herriman. These are the fastest growing population areas. Businesses are flocking there. Traffic congestion is becoming one of those Utah nightmares. As the population in those areas ages (matures) and more teenage drivers enter the picture the situation will only worsen. One doesn't have to look far to see how traffic planners don't keep up. And then there is the price of fuel! Mass transit (trax and bus) is the answer for all societal, economic, safety, and environmental reasons. To the "new rich", "live beyond your means", elite in Draper - there is nothing wrong with driving your BMW to a Trax park and ride lot and commuting downtown.

lost in DC | 3:21 p.m. July 11, 2008

I may be confused, some of you may even have that opinion from some of my other comments, but with gas above $4/gallon and going nowhere but up, I'd think close proximity to light rail would increase property value. I believe it adds about $250M to values homes in Arlington, VA close to metro stops over similar homes further away.

That being said, I am opposed to disenfranchising voters. I'd like to know how the individual members of the court voted, but I guess a complete story is too much to ask of a newspaper that is cutting back.

jmdspk | 3:41 p.m. July 11, 2008

Actually they did get a chance to vote in a city election where a bunch of the NIMBY's ran on the CRT platform.

Joke | 3:43 p.m. July 11, 2008

Utah is a joke when it comes to transit authority. I moved here from Denver receintly. Everyone jokes that Utah was the test subject to other cities on how to run lines. In Denver we ran our lines with the freeways to avoid stopping traffic. Utah's officials are not bright!

Good decision | 3:47 p.m. July 11, 2008

To "lost in DC": voters were not disenfranchised on this issue. The existing lines have been owned by UTA for a long time and use of them was part of their master plan. The city council approved their plan to do what they (UTA) already had a right to do. County wide (including Draper) voters approved funding for mass transit expansion. Draper voters approved in council elections and ballot questions UTA related issues. Disgruntled groups organized, tried to petition to get votes overturned, and were rebuffed at every step along the way. What has happened is the working of the democratic system. But as always there are those who say "no fair" because they didn't get their way. You raise an excellent point about the appreciation of property values; something many of those disgruntled should consider. But in the end they probably won't have to, because they are living beyond their means as it is and their homes will probably go into foreclosure like many others in Utah soon anyway. Even elite Draperites are not immune from economic realities.

jmdspk | 3:51 p.m. July 11, 2008

To Joke: Actually running along freeways is about the worse way to run a light rail line. Denver did because they had no choice but they loose riders because it is so difficult to get to and from the stations.

senoj | 3:49 p.m. July 11, 2008

Isn't amazing that those on the East side cry foul when they don't get to vote on a TRAX line, but feel no sympathy for those on the West side when they had no voice in the vote on the School District split.

i-survived-roe-v-wade | 4:06 p.m. July 11, 2008

Who in draper will ride trax? Run it along the free way where people that actually take pub trans(ie lower income, "ecomonically minded people") horrible choice for location.

About time... | 4:16 p.m. July 11, 2008

It's time to put this to bed. No elite realtors whining about the light-rail coming into their neighborhood, bringing gangs, less desirables, and (gasp) west-siders into Draper! Heaven forbid! You might actually have to share your town with the rest of us. When you do, you'll find we spend money and contribute to your economy, paying your sons and daughters wages in all the commercial development along 12300 South. And those who want to travel to the area to go hiking in the mountains will have an easier way to get there than fighting through all the two lane roads that inhabit your fair city.

BG | 4:16 p.m. July 11, 2008

To Joke: Denver is not regarded as a shining light of public transit, while TRAX is considered one of the best examples of well-designed and well-used public transit. As jmdspk pointed out, running the line next to the freeway is one of the last options. UTA's proposed route was actually well-thought and will provide a viable transit route in a region and through a corridor that has previously been ignored.

James H | 4:56 p.m. July 11, 2008

So, are these the same Draper "Not in my backyard" people who wouldn't allow a Deseret Industries in their city, but welcomed a temple?

T_H_R_O | 5:37 p.m. July 11, 2008

I like being close to TRAX, but I don't live in Draper.

Utah Supreme Court decision or no, "elite" community or no ("elite" as a perjorative is used by haters, btw - y'all wish you could afford a home there), there's no problem with a community voting to decide what happens there!

Why is UTA so insistent on running a line to a place with such mixed support? Who's the line for, anyway? Draper or UTA? I'm sure there are other communities that would love to have a TRAX line nearby and likely be more likely to use and PAY for it!

Our public transit is behaving more like a private enterprise would with its land. Odd, given that customers aren't going to come just because you build it. Draper is low-density, upper-income residential. Residents are more likely able to shoulder the burden of rising gas prices. I don't see the benefits - not just $$ - being commensurate, much less outweighing the cost of the line.

Anonymous | 6:05 p.m. July 11, 2008

Letï¿½s be honestï¿½rising fuel cost are inevitable, the air quality along the Wasatch will only get worst and using the existing unused old rail lines make fiscals sense.
I live in Draper and it is the delusional self appointed that have a misguided entitlement that think they are on a just cause for all of us. I commend the Supreme Court for getting it right.

The Facts | 6:16 p.m. July 11, 2008

People in communities should be allowed to decide what runs through them. Maybe public sentiments have changed since the city council passed it. Most in Draper will not use it so move it out of their neighborhoods.

The real truth is that if Trax were full to capacity every day they could/would not make a dent in the freeway traffic. The "greenies" over-ride people votes/rights to ram their agendas down the populations throat all over the country. Traffic will still be bad after they run TRAX through Draper. The "greenies" won't be satisfied though until you have paid ridiculous prices to give them a ride the way they want. They want to legislate how you travel because they "know" whats best for you.

Denver transit is a joke. They spent years of ridiculous traffic congestion to install rail alongside I-25 through Denver. Now its done--guess what?? Their taxes are now higher AND congestion on the freeway is just as bad or worse than when they started it. I go there for work regularly--before, during, and after construction. Don't be bragging about Denver.

The greenies always say mass-transit solves the worlds problems and yet after install--things stay the same. Hmmmm.

Elitist | 6:40 p.m. July 11, 2008

I guess I'm one of those elitists that all of you non-elitists are calling names. Do you know me?

What is it with the judging fools on these boards who know nothing apparently about anything?

I live in Draper and would welcome TRAX, yesterday. I'd also welcome more buses and taxis. I lived in Japan and they have mass transit down completely.

But for now, I will drive my car and just wave at all of you low-life's who don't live in my neighborhood and who I wouldn't want to be friends with anyway.

There are enough judgmental morons walking around the streets that we don't need you in our neighborhoods.

Please keep your psychedelic VW Van out of Draper.

Ol' time Salt Laker | 7:06 p.m. July 11, 2008

The Court got it right.

The needs of the many allow the government to place a burden on a few.

Besides, I have friends that live next to commmuter railroad tracks in the East, and friends that live under the landing approach of a major internatinoal airport in the South.

Both friends say that after a few months, you dont' even hear or notice when a train/jet passes by. Your brian is adaptable, and tunes it out of what you notice. (Isn't God an amazing engineer?)

NIMBY | 7:15 p.m. July 11, 2008

Look, it isn't the citizens of Draper as a whole that should be criticized about this fiasco. It's the CRT and its members. I can't think of a clearer form of NIMBY. "We want TRAX in Draper, just not in our neighborhood". It doesn't seem to matter to them that the prefered route (which runs on an existing right-of-way) will cost millions of dollors less, and will afford far greater access to the residents of Draper as a whole.

To the CRT. Buying a house next to a railroad line was a gamble. Now trains are comming. You can either bark and be upset about it, or you can hop aboard and take advantage of it.

I say, "All aboard!"

Anonymous | 7:35 p.m. July 11, 2008

Greenie? In Utah, never.

Go west young man | 8:10 p.m. July 11, 2008

Draper doesn't want TRAX. Put it where it is needed and wanted - the west side. Draper wants valet service at the TRAX stations.

Never have had a say | 8:23 p.m. July 11, 2008

Remember way back when, we voted on a trax system--
AND THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE VOTED IT DOWN!!!!!!!
The politians and big busness cram it down our throats anyway - probably because to much money was to be made. The courts said we really did not vote it down, but they just had to fund it different. When people tried to get a court order for a vote, the COURTS SAID NO. What makes you think we the people have ever had a say.

jmdspk | 10:26 p.m. July 11, 2008

To Never Had A Say: Are you talking about the balot measure almost 16 years ago that included lots of money for highways some for transit before anything was operating. So what part actually got voted down? I guess the two more recent votes mean nothing.

Most people I know that live in Draper wanted TRAX. The ex-UP route makes the most since. The area around State/123rd South is already a nightmare, TRAX will be able to by pass all that.

To: Facts, or I mean bad facts. The truth is TRAX gives the people the freedom to not have to deal with traffic.

JJ | 10:25 p.m. July 11, 2008

There are many in Draper that want and are happy about TRAX. Please don't assume that because some said that Draper doesn't want TRAX they speak for all of us.

Anonymous | 1:19 a.m. July 12, 2008

Now TRAX just needs to make it to Utah County...

Governmental Immunity At Work | 1:20 a.m. July 12, 2008

What is shocking in the legal opinion is that the court refused to even address the topic of whether the ICA is constitutional. To be frank it plainly is not. UTA has managed to obtain absolute discretion in this state. What's more, there is no oversight to this poorly run, ill equiped and mismanaged financial DEBACLE of an entity. It is quasi-governmental in operation and yet now it appears it is untouchable. For those of you who are upset about elitism - good on you - but for those of you who are concerned about justice - THIS SHOULD MAKE THE HAIR ON THE BACK OF YOUR NECK STAND STRAIGHT UP!
Just another instance of the Governmental Immunity clause at work.... And we the people take another one on the chin.

jmdspk | 3:33 p.m. July 13, 2008

To Government Immunity At Work: UTA is the landowner, doesn't that mean they should be able to do what they want with their property despite some NIMBY's?

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.