Lark, Utah: a case study of public communication in community organizing

This thesis presents the notion of public communication in community organizing and traces how it functions through the illustrative example of the closing of the mining town of Lark, Utah. Shortly before Christmas 1977, Kennecott Copper Corporation announced it had purchased the town of Lark and the residents would be forced to leave. Some of the residents resisted and by May 1978 their opposition to the company had developed into a national news story. The Lark, Utah story is viewed as an event characteristic of the new citizen action movement in which residents of local communities such as Lark are typically in confrontation with corporate or government actions seen to be contrary to the community interest. The elements of the citizen action movement are described, and the place of community organizing and public communication within it is discussed. The process of public communication in community organizing is then demonstrated by recounting how the Lark residents expressed in word and deed their opposition to Kennecott Copper and the town closure. Taken together, the Lark community organizing experience and the articulation of it through publie communication provides a working model of what may occur in communities faced with similar situations. In order to provide an empirical basis for the model of public communication in community organizing, a historical account of the Lark, Utah story is given. The account is based on a variety of sources including interviews with principal participants, tape recordings of key meetings, newspaper and magazine stories, television videotapes, and personal correspondence. Findings indicate that a group of Lark residents in opposition to Kennecott's closing of the town, with community support and the help of a professional organizer, organized against the company. Using effective public communication, based in large part on successful manipulation of the mass media, the group managed to make the company respond to their demands. Although it is difficult to estimate the full impact of the Lark opposition group on the final Kennecott settlement with residents, the final outcome suggests that citizens acting together forced a more thorough consideration of their needs. This case also demonstrates the elements described in the community organizing process model are more like "phases" rather than "steps." The lines separating these phases were not clear cut; successful accomplishment of a v particular phase was not always maintained as the group pursued its course of action, frequently changing in size or character. However, the model was shown to be useful in demonstrating what could be, or had to be, accomplished at any particular point in the organizing of the community group.

LARK, UTAH: A CASE STUDY OF PUBLIC COMMUNICATION IN COMMUNITY ORGANIZING by Timothy Jess Funk A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Utah in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mass Communication Department of Communication The University of Utah June 1983 198 3 Timothy Jess Funk All Rights Reserved THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH GRADUATE SCHOOL SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE APPROVAL o f a thesis submitted by Timothy Jess Funk This thesis has been read by each member o f the following supervisory committee and by majority vote has been found to be satisfactory. Chairmaij/'Jajnes A. AndeFson Timoth^j/. Larson ■3 / 7 / 3 3 ___________ Milton Hollstein THE U N IV E R S IT Y O F UTAH G R A D U A T E S C H O O L FINAL READING APPROVAL To the Graduate C ouncil of The University of Utah: Ihave read the thesis of Timothy Jess Funk__________________________ in jts final form and have found that (1) its format, citations, and bibliographic style are consistent and acceptable; (2) its illustrative materials including figures, tables, and charts are in place: and (3) the final manuscript is satisfactory to the Supervisory Committee and is ready for submission to the Graduate School. lesA.^ArSerson Member. Supervisory Committee Approved for the M ajor Department Robert K. Tiemens Chairm an Dean Approved for the Graduate Council James t. Clayto'h Dean o! The Graduate Scfiool ABSTRACT This thesis presents the notion of public communi­ cation in community organizing and traces how it func­ tions through the illustrative example of the closing of the mining town of Lark, Utah. Shortly before Christmas 1977, Kennecott Copper Corporation announced it had pur­ chased the town of Lark and the residents would be forced to leave. Some of the residents resisted and by May 1978 their opposition to the company had developed into a na­ tional news story. The Lark, Utah story is viewed as an event char­ acteristic of the new citizen action movement in which residents of local communities such as Lark are typically in confrontation with corporate or government actions seen to be contrary to the community interest. The ele­ ments of the citizen action movement are described, and the place of community organizing and public communica­ tion within it is discussed. The process of public com­ munication in community organizing is then demonstrated by recounting how the Lark residents expressed in word and deed their opposition to Kennecott Copper and the town closure. Taken together, the Lark community orga­ nizing experience and the articulation of it through pub- lie communication provides a working model of what may occur in communities faced with similar situations. In order to provide an empirical basis for the model of public communication in community organizing, a historical account of the Lark, Utah story is given. The account is based on a variety of sources including interviews with principal participants, tape recordings of key meetings, newspaper and magazine stories, televi­ sion videotapes, and personal correspondence. Findings indicate that a group of Lark residents in opposition to Kennecott's closing of the town, with community support and the help of a professional orga­ nizer, organized against the company. Using effective public communication, based in large part on successful manipulation of the mass media, the group managed to make the company respond to their demands. Although it is difficult to estimate the full im­ pact of the Lark opposition group on the final Kennecott settlement with residents, the final outcome suggests that citizens acting together forced a more thorough con­ sideration of their needs. This case also demonstrates the elements described in the community organizing process model are more like "phases" rather than "steps." The lines separating these phases were not clear cut; successful accomplishment of a v particular phase was not always maintained as the group pursued its course of action, frequently changing in size or character. However, the model was shown to be useful in demonstrating what could be, or had to be, accom­ plished at any particular point in the organizing of the community group. vi CONTENTS ABSTRACT..................... ................. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................... ix Chapter I. II. INTRODUCTION ............................. 1 N o t e s ................................. 10 THE NEW CITIZEN ACTION M O V E M E N T .......... Community Organizing ................... Principles of Community Organizing . . . . Community Organizing: The Process . . . . Participation ......................... Public Communication ................... Public Communication in Community Organizing........................... Functions of Public Communication . . . The Practice of Public Communication . . R o l e s ............................... Practice of Public Communication and Public Relations ................... N o t e s ................................. III. THE LARK UTAH CASE S T U D Y ................. Residents Respond ..................... Outside Interest ........................ After Christmas A New Season Begins . . . Two Fronts Form in L a r k ................ Outsiders Coming In: The Second Front . . Community Organizer Assigned ............ Community Organizing Begins ............ Past Experience of the Organizers . . . . Talking With the Residents.............. The Seeds of Organized Opposition . . . . Renters Come T o g e t h e r ................. Unity is Difficult..................... Renters and Homeowners Together ........ The Power S h i f t s ....................... Hard Feelings Develop ................. 11 14 15 16 18 20 21 21 22 24 26 30 33 40 41 46 48 51 56 58 60 62 64 68 72 74 78 84 Searching for U n i t y ................... Water, Rust, and Demolition ............ The Opposition Expands ................. The Gap Broadens....................... Leonard Miller Resigns ................. A New Strategy F o r m s ................... The Next Steps to T a k e ................. Kennecott and Curtiss-Wright Slug it Out . The Opposition Works Its Strategy . . . . The Delegation Forms, Advance Plans are M a d e ................................. Why Go to New Y o r k ? ................... The Advance W o r k ....................... The Delegation Story Grows .............. Stockholders in Human Lives ............ Getting Ready for Kremer ............... "Sharpshooting" Leads Nowhere .......... The Delegation "Sits I n " ................ Sitting In Overnight ................... The Role of Hilda G r a b n e r .............. Hilda Returns, Kennecott Does Too! . . . . Milliken's Media Event ................. Preparing for the M e e t i n g .............. Kennecott Makes Its Offer .............. The Town Decides to V o t e ............... Campaign Against Approval .............. The Vote is T a k e n ..................... A Final Round of Comments .............. N o t e s ................................. IV. SUMMATION AND C O N C L U S I O N S ................ 86 90 95 97 101 102 105 106 109 114 116 118 12 0 12 3 127 129 133 135 142 145 146 148 150 154 157 16 0 164 168 179 S u m m a t i o n ............................. C o n c l u s i o n s ........................... N o t e s ................................. 17 9 181 198 APPENDIX....................................... 199 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................... 222 V I T A ........................................... 228 viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Several persons influenced the writing and com­ pletion of this thesis. Dr. James A. Anderson, chairman of my thesis committee, gave me insight and encourage­ ment, Dr. Milton Hollstein endured with me the many years it took to finish, and Dr. Timothy Larson showed a favor for the subject and an instinct for the purpose of the study. The people of the Lark Residents' group were gen­ erous with themselves, their time and resource mater­ ials. Western Action Training Institute staff members Dan Lopp and Earle Warner were willing sources of opin­ ion and materials including extensive use of their tape recordings of key events in the story, and KUTV-2, Salt Lake City, who made available its video tape archive and so helped complete the historical record. Ken Kefauver and Gene Petersen, former Kennecott officials, were es­ pecially candid in their recounting of the story. I am much indebted to all those mentioned. My largest thanks goes to the main figures in the Lark residents group: Bob Bardsley, Emma Jean Howland, Elaine and Bernie Trujillo, Ruth Trujillo, and Hilda Grabner and to their community organizer, Rich Tuttle of Western Action, who made the story happen and gave me the opportunity to study and learn from it. Finally, I wish to thank my family and friends who supported me in this effort, especially Nancy M. Funk, who sparked my confidence, and C. K. Mitchell, who kept me on course. x I. INTRODUCTION In late April and early May 1978, the closing of the small mining town of Lark, Utah became a news story attracting national interest. The account of how a giant corporation, Kennecott Copper Corporation, was shutting down a community of fewer than 600 residents was carried nationwide by the major television networks and wire services and covered by the New York Times and ■ » Washington Post.x For the past century the fading of Western mining settlements similar to Lark attracted little or no pub­ lic attention. Kennecott itself had closed several mining towns in the decade before 1978, creating only . minor concern beyond the local community. 2 The Lark experience was different. From the time just before Christmas 1977, when Kennecott announced its plans to close the town, on to May 1978 when the company offered the residents a settlement, the situation was never totally calm. In the beginning, residents responded strongly to the closure, saying it was unfair. Opposi­ tion to the company quieted for a time only to rise up in full force as some Lark citizens began to organize in resistance. 2 During the six months between the December an­ nouncement and the company's settlement offering in May, individual Lark residents with the help of several Salt Lake area community-based groups, and assistance of a professional community organizer, formed themselves into a group which confronted Kennecott on how it would settle with residents. The confrontation grew into an event of some magnitude. A significant event in and of itself, the Lark story may be viewed as part of a larger, broader trend towards organized citizen action originating at the local level. Lark occurred at a time of increasing citizen activism in American society.^ Citizens desiring change in their neighborhoods— schools— workplace— in virtually any aspect of their lives— were recognizing more and more their inability to solve problems individually. Alone, people found themselves incapable of changing things, but came to recognize that together they might get some­ thing done.^ For ten years the author worked in various capa­ cities with numerous citizen action groups seeking some change in the power structure. Typically, it was the author's role to help organize the group and/or assist them with effective expression of their purpose and goals. After considerable experience in that capacity the author had cause to wonder why some organizing situ­ 3 ations and the expression of them succeeded when others faltered. As a person directly involved in such situa­ tions, it seemed valuable, if not necessary, that the author discover more completely what he was doingt understand more clearly what was happening, learn how to do it better, in order to pass such information and learning on to others engaged in similar work. As director of the Utah State Coalition of Senior Citizens at the time the Lark, Utah, story began, the author found himself fully involved with the development of a citizens group at its inception. The Utah Senior Coalition advocated actively for the rights of older Utah citizens and when the condition of citizens in Lark came into question the author reviewed the situation and further involvement was dictated. As the story pro­ gressed the author eventually became an advisor, re­ source and friend to the Lark citizens' group and the community organizer working with it. During the Lark episode the Senior Coalition office and staff served as the coordinating link between other Salt Lake based social action groups and individuals working with the Lark issue. His direct involvement in a unique organizing setting, a professional background and experience in community affairs, and his pursuit of a graduate degree in journalism and mass communication compelled the 4 author to gather information and examine what happened in the Lark community organizing experience. In that light, the Lark, Utah story offers a val­ uable opportunity to study the dynamics of organizing and communication found in the citizen action setting. Given the advent of increasing citizen activism, such study is needed to reveal some of the basic elements of a now emerging movement and to help point the way for more ef­ fective participation in it. It appeared at the time of this writing that contemporary citizen action and commu­ nity organizing had been the subject of little research. The communications dynamics involved within citizen ac­ tion was even less developed, and the notion of public communication presented within this thesis appeared to be an entirely new construction. In his search of the lit­ erature on community organizing and communication, the author discovered the materials available focused either on social action and protest generally or on specific types of citizen action such as "environmental action" or "women1s rights." Some reason for this absence was given by Mike Miller in his Idealogy of the Community Organization Movement.5 He said that while protest and action cer­ tainly were not new to American democratic activity, the diverse and localized nature of present day grassroots community organizing was. Because of its newness no baseline theoretical work or works encompassing its many aspects had then been written. Furthermore, according to Miller, those practicing community organizing vigorously resisted being tied into any idealogical framework, some­ thing Miller said he himself struggled with in his work as an organizer and advisor to community groups. This absence of any wholly representative treatment of citizen action and community organizing left one the task of choosing among many sources which together gave at least a general description of organizing and communication. A main work on contemporary grassroots organizing in Amer­ ica was Harry C. Boyte's The Backyard Revolution, Under­ standing the New Citizen Movement,^ which gave a compre­ hensive analysis of the myriad manifestations of citizen action and its many sources. Relying on Boyte for a broader perspective, the author reviewed key works in community organizing literature including Saul Alinsky's 7 classics, Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals, Si Kahn's How People Get Power, Organizing Oppressed g Communities for Action, 9 Organizing, and Shel Trapp's Dynamics of to glean some of the essentials of the or­ ganizing process. Several citizen action guides were studied to try and achieve an even more fundamental out­ line of citizen action, organizing and communication. One source, Donna McDowell's The New Older Citizen's Guide: Advocacy and Action,^ available through the Penn­ sylvania State Department of Public Welfare, illustrated clearly the relationship between grassroots organizing and the need for effective communications. The discussion of effective communication within community organizing in Si Kahn's Organizing; A Guide for Grassroots Leaders^ was the single best work relating the importance of what a citizen group communicates to how it communicates it. Kahn's book was especially use­ ful because it tied the general purpose of citizen action and communication together and discussed its practical application through use of the mass media. From Kahn's Organizing also came hints of the basic premise of the public communication notion explored in this thesis and the functions of it. Much of the description of those functions in this thesis were also derived from the dis­ cussion of the need for strong interpersonal communica­ tions given in Kahn's How People Get Power. Using these sources as something of a theoretical base the author combined the information gained from them with material gained in a series of interviews with prin­ cipal members of Western Action Training Institute of Salt Lake City, the community organizing training and technical assistance organization which assigned the pro­ fessional community organizer to Lark. Western Action furnished unpublished papers written primarily by Earle Warner, their program developer and chief proposal writ­ er, describing their grassroots organizing philosophy and the essential nature of strong communication between res­ . idents, organizers, supporters and other parties. 12 Western Action subscribed to a "whatever works is best" approach to community organizing and reflected the gen­ eral attitude noted by Miller that some organizing pro­ fessionals shy away from extensive written treatments of their work or the philosophy behind it. As a final source, the author's experience in similar community or­ ganizing situations was relied upon to facilitate the choice of materials and their interpretation. From this literature a model of the community organizing process, and the public communication which is part of it, emerged. This model is descriptive in that it provides recognizable "steps" or "phrases" in the course of the development of an organizing group. The model is also useful in predicting what has to be accomplished before the group can mature and the point where certain activi­ ties, such as goal setting, action planning and the like, can best be achieved. In order to provide an empirical basis for this model a descriptive historical study was made of the event starting in December 1977, when Kennecott announced the closing of Lark, up to August 1978, when the situa­ tion was resolved. Primary sources included: personal interviews with approximately twenty-five persons includ­ 8 ing Lark residents, Kennecott officials, community sup­ porters, and local and national news media reporters; tape recordings of town meetings and group strategy sessions, a complete set of the Lark Newsletter published during the December-August period, the personal corres­ pondence of the participants, newspaper clippings and magazine articles, the KUTV-2 Salt Lake City, video tape archive and the author's own field notes for the period. Research was conducted in the following way: the Lark Newsletters, news clippings, video tapes, tape re­ cordings and correspondence were reviewed, transcriptions were made of the video and audio tapes, and a chronology was developed providing a historical framework. Then personal interviews were conducted with the major figures in the story. A historical study was then developed using a chronological presentation based upon the infor­ mation gathered, which in turn was examined in light of the analysis of the development of community organizing groups. This thesis is presented as follows: Chapter I, this chapter, provides an introduction to the literature and to the Lark story and its impor­ tance as a citizen action event useful for the study of public communication in community organizing. A review of the sources, method and questions to be answered in pursuit of the study has been given. 9 Chapter II begins with a description of the citi­ zen action movement and community organizing's place within it. Community organizing is described, its prin­ ciples outlined, a model of the community organizing pro­ cess is presented, and steps in it are discussed. Public communication is described, its place within community organizing, its functions, practice and the roles of par­ ticipants are discussed. And finally, a comparison be­ tween public communication and public relations is made. Chapter III presents the case history of the Lark story from the announcement of Kennecott Copper Corpora­ tion on 14 December 1977 of the town closing, up to August 197 8 after the company had settled with the town residents. Chapter IV includes a summation of the Lark story and offers an analysis of the community organizing and public communication which occurred. It draws conclu­ sions on what the story reveals about citizen action and communication, and includes a section on the role of the mass media in the Lark experience. 10 Notes ■^KSL AM-TV, "Property Rights and Eminent Domain," editorial, 17 May 1978, Salt Lake City. 2Lark residents' • group strategy meeting, 24 Febru­ ary 1978, tape recording made by Western Action Training Institute, copy in author's possession; "Lark advised on Lack of Permanence," Salt Lake Tribune, 17 December 1977. Sec. B, p. 3; Interview with Gene Petersen, Kennecott Lark representative, Salt Lake City, 16 December 1981. ^Harry C. Boyte, The Backyard Revolution, Under­ standing the New Citizen Movement (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1980), pp. 1-23. 4 Si Kahn, Organizing: A Guide for Grassroots Leaders (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1982), pp. 1-19. ^Mike Miller, The Ideology of the Community Or­ ganizing Movement (San Francisco: Organizing Training Center, 1979) (mimeographed), pp. 1-6. r Boyte, Backyard Revolution. 7 Saul Alinsky, Reveille for-Radicals (New York: Random House, 1969) and Alinsky, Rules for Radicals (New York: Random House, 1972). g Si Kahn, How People Get Power, Organizing Oppressed Communities for Action (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 19 70). 9 Shel Trapp, Dynamics of Organizing (Chicago: National Training and Information Center, 1976). ^^Donna McDowell, The New Older Citizens Guide: Advocacy and Action (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Depart­ ment of Public Welfare, 1977). ■'■"''Kahn, Organizing, pp. 225-256. 12 Earle Warner, "A Brief Overview of Western Western Action's Grassroots Organizing Philosophy and Approach" (Salt Lake City: Western Action Training Institute, 1979) (unpublished); and Warner, "The Rocky Mountain West" (Salt Lake City: Western Action Training Institute, 1980) (unpublished). II. THE NEW CITIZEN ACTION MOVEMENT Click on the TV news or pick up the daily news­ paper and witness what may be called the "new citizen action movement."'*" A neighborhood opposes a freeway interchange, consumers protest utility rate hikes, work­ ing mothers seek better day care facilities, homeowners petition for repeal of property taxes, neighbors form a crime watch network or plant community gardens; these are the many and varied forms of "citizen action." Known variously as the "backyard revolution," "community organizing," "grassroots politics," "citizen revolt," "the neighborhood movement," or "advocacy in action," the citizen movement encompasses these various forms of protest, social action, self help, coalition, and community building that started and continue today at the local, neighborhood level. The citizen action movement developed in the 197 0s largely as an outgrowth of the political action movements of the 1950s and 1960s. Citizen involvement in the civil rights, anti­ war, ecology, woman's, consumer, anti-poverty, peace, and other movements made the general citizenry aware of their own individual potential for personal democratic . 2 action. 12 Such awareness is demonstrated by the hundreds or perhaps thousands of citizen based groups that sprang up during the 1970s and continue to form as problems and issues appear. As a movement, citizen action has not been clearly identified and labelled. nature, it is not easily defined. By its diverse With roots in the late 1960s and beyond, it lacks the sense of identity and history that marks other movements. On its largest scale citizen action is seen as a direct response to what Mike Miller describes as "The twin enemies . . . the giant modern corporation and its wealth and power, and the modern state bureaucracy with its own form of abuse and a r r o g a n c e . I n Miller's view, the growth in size of big business and big government has resulted in the concentration and centralization of power. Corpora­ tions and bureaucracies make decisions not in the inter­ est of the majority of people and the ordinary citizen feels helpless, unable to do anything. Miller states, "Not only are bad decisions being made, but the process of decision-making contradicts our values and undermines 4 the character of our people." Citizen action occurs to redress the imbalance between large institutions and the citizenry. The main purpose of the local citizen action group and ultimately the national citizen movement is organizing people for power, for the power they need to deal more effectively with the government or corporate powers affecting their lives.^ With access to power, citizens can seek two things from government and business: accountability and participation. Accountability is sought from government or corporations for the actions they take which affect people's lives. Citizens organizing together try to make institutions at whatever level responsible for the decisions they make. Participation is sought from the public and private sector by demanding that citizens be involved in a meaningful way in the decisions affecting g their lives. As a movement, citizen action features a diver­ sity that crosses community, social and income lines in its efforts to unite people and build coalitions. While it has no single unifying theme such as "peace," "civil rights," or "ecology," the movement does have certain identifiable characteristics. First, citizen action most often originates in groups that are locally based and democratically run. The groups or organizations which typify the movement are made up of local citizens who come together over issues, make plans and take ac­ tion. Second, citizen action reflects the basic tradi­ tions, folkways, and culture of the American democratic system. "Family, flag and faith" are values repre­ sented in the nature of the local groups. However, as a movement it is non-partisan and nonsectarian; there 14 is no single political or religious persuasion at its base. Rather it is multi-issue, tactic and constitu­ ency. Third, local citizen action groups are often part of an unofficial, loose-knit but highly interdependent related system of regional and national action networks through which information, resources, personnel and plans and experiences are shared. Finally, the citizen action movement is institutionalized to the extent there are avowed citizen action organizing methods and prac­ titioners, established training and resource centers, a . body of literature, and common traditions. 7 Although citizen action may take one of several forms, direct action community based organizing is the form most clearly identified. The terms "community organizing" and "citizen action" are often used inter­ changeably to describe the same kinds of activity. For our purposes, however, citizen action describes an emerging movement and the trend of activity, events, and ethical beliefs or impulses that represent it, including g the concept of "community organizing." Community Organizing Citizen action is best characterized through com­ munity organizing, which can be described as activity at the local level in which individual citizens sharing a mutual concern about a problem join together, organize 15 into a group, identify the cause of the problem, choose a solution, plan a strategy to achieve it, and then put the strategy to work m 9 word and deed. Community organizing usually occurs in local situations, on a specific ad hoc issue, concerning the self interests of certain residents who are seeking practical solutions to their problems. It occurs to give residents enough power to control what they see is in their self-interest. For example, if the highway department announces a proposal to construct a new free­ way interchange in the west side of town, residents of that area can be brought together by that specific issue— the freeway interchange— which will change their way of life. They may be opposed and they organize to see what they can do in their own interest to change or stop the proposal. Presumably, they have more potential power as a group than as individuals to make the highway department respond to them. Principles of Community Organizing Community organizing practitioners underscore three basic principles to pursue when organizing for power. They say organizing must: 1. Win real improvements in people's lives 2. Give them a sense of their own power 3. Alter the relationships of power.10 16 Following these principles it is theorized that community organizing occurs because local residents acting in their own self-interest want to see some im­ provement in their lives. They want a new traffic light, better police protection, less pollution— what­ ever concerns them enough to get together for collective group action. To win this improvement they need the power to acquire it. Power comes from the organizing effort in which the group chooses its goal, makes a plan and acts it out. By participating in that activity of pursuing a goal that represents a meaningful improvement, the resi­ dents have the opportunity to learn of their own power potential. And, presumably, if they are successful in gaining a concession from the responsible party in power the residents gain a sense of their own power; because of what they did they are able to shift the relationship of power between the target and themselves. Community Organizing: The Process When disagreement occurs between a public or pri­ vate body and the local community over what is in the public interest certain events unfold as the steps or phases in the community organizing process: Problem Develops 17 Community Responds Individuals Form a Group Organizer Appears Leadership Emerges Work with Supporters Build Agenda Pick Objective Plan Strategy Action and Tactics Evaluation When a problem develops, the community begins to respond, and individuals begin to communicate with each other about their common concern. about what to do. They start talking They get together and form a group. Leaders are selected to represent the group, and respond to supporters outside of the immediate community. Often, a professional organizer will be asked to advise the group. 18 Through its leadership members of the group build an agenda of what they want to do. This includes pick­ ing an objective for what they want to accomplish and planning a strategy. Incorporated in the stragegy will be action and tactics deemed necessary to reach the ob­ jective. Finally, the group will constantly evaluate the progress of its strategy to decide what further action is needed.^ Participation The experience of professional community organiz­ ers and this observer shows that local residents start coming together when aware of their common concern. Their awareness may come gradually over a few weeks or months: down. "The neighborhood has never looked this run­ We've got a problem." Or awareness may be sud­ den: "They're converting our building to condominiums and we're being evicted." Or it may be introduced: "Hi, I'm with the senior high rise residents' groups. We're working to get better bus service here on Third Avenue." Who gets people together is another matter. As James David Barber says in Citizen Politics: . . . In our communities we don't just join spontaneously with others for political purposes. We come together when someone gets us together, we stay together while someone leads us effectively Within the community setting the impetus for coming together may be initiated by the resident, sym­ pathetic supporters or by a professional organizer. Usually the call comes from many quarters at about the same time and, although the supporters and organizers often perform key roles in getting things going, leader­ ship ultimately rests with the residents themselves. Residents, supporters and organizers make up what could be called the community group circle. Each ful­ fills a distinct role in the organizing process. Resi­ dents comprise the constituency of the citizen action group, their concerns give cause for organizing and action and from them comes the leadership for their effort. Supporters are the family, friends and re­ sources sympathetic to the residents' concerns who con­ tribute in some way to the effort. The organizer is usually a professional person whose job it is to advise the community group and facilitate its progress. This person typically appears at the request of the residents or their supporters. Those participating in an organizing situation can be resident volunteers or paid staff depending upon the size of the group, how long it has been together, and what resources it has available. A group may form for one particular issue, operate for several months or a year on a voluntary basis, and then go out of business once their concerns are met or interest diminishes. In 20 some cases, single issue groups have continued on and expanded to become fully established, incorporated or­ ganizations with official membership, paid staff, of­ fices, newsletters, and a complete program of issues. A main feature of the community group, whether single issue or long term in nature, is self-governance. Through democratic procedures the group membership reaches consensus on what action to take. "own" and run their group. The members Self-governance means the group is autonomous, independent to contend with the 13 state or corporate powers it faces. Public Communication Shel Trapp, a longtime community organizer, says: . . . the goal of every community organization is to build power, people power, so the community can determine its needs, articulate them, and fight for them. . . .14 As the events in the community organizing process unfold the participants find themselves engaged in what might be termed "public communication," an activity which can be described as the expression in word or deed of an organized community group, undertaken to communi­ cate concern caused by political or economic activity seen as contrary to the community's interest. Using this description, public communication includes whatever the community group says or does in the organizing process to communicate its concerns, 21 support, and gain the power it needs to gain its objec­ tive. When community interest differs from the opinion of government or business, an issue develops and the process of citizen action and its expression through public communication begins.1^ Public Communication in Community Organizing Functions of Public Communication As citizen action unfolds it is expressed through four generally identifiable functions of public communi­ cation. Initially, public communication begins in the group formation, internally among group members. The individuals communicate among themselves about their common concern. By sharing information and experience, they reach a consensus for action. Next, public com­ munication goes outward as the group expresses its oppo­ sition to the public or private body responsible for the problem. Then public communication externalizes the group's expression further by publicizing it to the general public, to the news media, and to potentially sympathetic third parties. tions provides feedback. Finally, public communica­ The group finds out how well its message has been received by the feedback it gets from the: • responsible party ("no comment," "go away," "gee, we're sorry," etc.); 22 • general public ("so what," "too bad," "those rascals," "you deserve it"); • the news media ("why," "is that true," "what's their response," "what are you going to do next"); and from • potential supporters ("what can we do," "do you need help," "have you tried . . ."). From these messages the group gets an idea of how well its effort is being received. Further feedback is received when group members see themselves portrayed through the publicity they generate. They see them­ selves in an active role which either reinforces or diminishes their self image as activists. In summary, for public communication to succeed the community organizing effort must have: (1) strong internal information sharing within the group; (2) a clear external public projection of the group position to the responsible corporate or governmental body, the news media, and potential third party supporters; and (3) feedback revealing both within the group and from the outside how the group effort is understood and integrated. The Practice of Public Communication Everyone involved in the community group circle— the resident, the organizer and the supporters— practice public communication. At the start residents practice a kind of primary 23 public communication based on their common sharing of information. It is person-to-person, face-to-face, neighbor-to-neighbor communication between residents that develops the general awareness a problem exists. As an issue emerges the residents talk to each other about it, they learn of each other's common concern and communicate a desire to do something about the is­ sue. If the concern continues a group forms and more discussion takes place. At this point public communica­ tion goes from the personal level to the group level and becomes more communal and more structured. Specific questions are asked about what to do and how to do it and group members are assigned to find out. The group members assigned to seek answers enter a new phase in the action and communication process. They must search beyond the group to find the informa­ tion they need. Their communication has been externa­ lized, they are talking with third party sources of in­ formation be they supporters, the organizer, the news media or the general public. As the group continues residents may practice a more formalized public communication. designated leaders or spokesmen. Residents are Someone may be asked to write letters, compile a fact sheet, produce a news­ letter, run a telephone line, do a news release, contact the news media, or run a community meeting. Taken to­ 24 gether this activity represents a more organized public communication practice within the group and to those outside of it. Either internally face-to-face or exter­ nally in a more organized form, the residents practice public communication to project their story to those who might be able to help them change things, to shift the balance of power. How well they do this often depends upon how well the community organizer performs. The organizer's job is to help get the residents together, focus their concerns, plan their strategy and put it to work. What is more, the organizer is there to facili­ tate how well the group expresses itself. If group mem­ bers make a planned, prepared attempt to persuade the public, their chances of successful public communication . 17 are increased. Roles Everyone involved in the community group circle— residents, the organizer and the supporters— practices public communication in some way. Residents fill personal and formal communication roles. Through their interpersonal networks they commu­ nicate person-to-person the internal sharing of informa­ tion about their common concern. Within the interper­ sonal networks there are opinion makers who may or may not fill an official capacity. Opinion makers often are the group leaders; they initiate the discussion, call meetings, seek outside advice and help, and given the democratic nature of most citizen groups, offer the views that eventually develop into consensus. Such opinion makers may have had some community standing before or the current situation may have brought them into a new leadership role. Supporters communicate backing, advice and the availability of resources. The family, friends and re­ source persons who typically constitute the support group represent a source of encouragement from the gen­ eral community, they offer opinions on how to do things, where to get help and who to contact. Supporters also provide a check on the organizing process. They can tell the resident group if the public image they are projecting is persuasive or not. An organizer fills many communication roles. On the personal side the organizer is the confidant and advisor to the group members, especially the leaders. He reflects them throughout the organizing process on how well they are communicating their message. The or­ ganizer guides the group, helps them collect their ideas and put them into coherent, understandable terms. On the formal side the organizer is a teacher of communica­ tion techniques, be it preparation of a news release, writing of a newsletter, or speaking at a community meeting. Both the organizer and the resource person are there as technical advisors to help the group members develop the skills they need to articulate their 18 cause. Practice of Public Communication and Public Relations Is public communication really a community-based form of public relations? Public communication and public relations are practiced to gain favorable publicity and to interpret activities to the general public and special publics. Publicity usually relays information and interpretation means there is some kind of ongoing public education process aimed at special publics and interested third parties. Public relations practiced by corporations or government are ultimately aimed at winning public sup­ port for either profits or programs said to be in the community interest. Public communications, on the other hand, in particular challenges whether or not those profits and programs are in the community interest at all. Public communications is really the antithesis of public relations. While the technology and techniques used are often the same, the origination and purpose are quite different. Public relations originates with the administra­ tion of an organization, where public communications typically originates with the membership of an organiza­ tion. Public relations originates from the top down; public communications originates from within the con­ sensus of the group or from the grassroots up. While public relations is the corporate or gov­ ernmental attempt to publicize and interpret what it is doing as socially responsible, public communication is the expression of the community groups' attempt to make the corporation or government accountable to that social responsibility seen by the community group. Public relations is continuous, whereas public communication is usually ad hoc. Public relations func­ tions as an ongoing process of an established organiza­ tion or institution. Conventional public relations follows a plan of programming, action and communication, and evaluation, which is sustained as long as the organ­ ization functions. Public relations is practiced to perpetuate that function. Public communication is also ongoing and can fol­ low a plan of fact finding, planning, action and evalua­ tion, as long as the community group continues to exist. In many instances, if a group organizes for one specific issue, when the problem is solved the group goes out of business and public communication ceases. Should a 28 group survive for an extended period of time, it will often find itself adopting a more established and so­ phisticated information and communication program. If the organization remains committed to action by con­ sensus, addressing issues by direct action, it will of necessity be practicing public communications. If the organization becomes more institutionalized and geared to perpetuating its place and function in the community, then it will soon be practicing public relations. Whether the practice of public relations and public communications contrast or converge in the final comparison both aim at answering the basic questions of how the policy, action and statements of the corporation or government meet the public (and more specifically the community) interest in question. Where does the process of community organizing and public communication finally lead? The end point depends upon the nature of the com­ munity group and the concern facing it. Often an ad hoc group forms and quickly resolves its problems through direct negotiation with the responsible party. In other situations the group may meet its needs through the pol­ itical system by getting a representative body to adopt a new policy or pass a new law. Yet again, the group may see no resolution in negotiation or conventional political action and thus organize for more direct ac- tion calling for a full issue campaign mobilizing the community into a confrontive stance with the targeted public or private entity. Whether quietly on a smaller scale or loudly in the public eye, community organizing as dramatized through public communication continues as long as the democratic system permits opinions to form and people Notes Much of the material in this chapter is de­ scribed in Harry C. Boyte, The Backyard Revolution, Understanding the New Citizen Movement (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1980). For the origin of the term new citizen movement see pp. xi-xiv. 2 Ibid., pp. 1-41. Also used extensively in the development of the new citizen movement concept was Mike Miller, The Ideology of the Community Organization Movement (San Francisco: Organizing Training Center, 1979) (Mimeographed), pp. 1-23. Alec Barbrooke and Christine Bolt, Protest and Power in American Life (Oxford: Martin Robertson, 198 0), is useful for its discussion of the protest movement after Wrold War II. 3 . Miller, Ideology, p. 11. 4Ibid., p. 12. ^Several excellent sources relating the dynamics of citizen action and empowerment include the two clas­ sics: Saul Alinsky, Reveille for Radicals (New York: Random House, 1969) and Alinsky, Rules for Radicals (New York: Random House, 1972). Other helpful treatments include Si Kahn, How People Get Power, Organizing Oppressed Communities for Action (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1970); Shel Trapp, Dynamics of Organizing (Chicago: National Train­ ing and Information Center, 197 6); Steve Max, Direct Action Organizing, vol. 1 (Chicago: Midwest Academy, 1977). These sources together provide a large part of the theoretical and practical framework used in this study. g Accountability particularly for big business is discussed in Edward I. Bernay, "Social Responsibility of Business," Public Relations Review, Winter, 1973, p. 5; David Vogel, Lobbying the Corporation: Citizen Challenges to Business Authority (New York: Basic Books, 1978) , pp. 7, 9.' 7 Characteristics of the citizen movement are de­ scribed in the following: Boyte, Backyard Revolution, pp. 1-43, and Miller, pp. 6-11 for theory and applica­ tion; Laurell Leff, "Local Groups that Aid the Poor Flourish by Using Confrontation Tactics," Wall Street Journal, 13 May 1981; Earle Warner, "A Brief Overview of Western Action's Grassroots Organizing Philosophy and Approach," and "The Rocky Mountain West," (Salt Lake City, Western Action Institute, 1979 (unpublished), for networking and methodology; and Boyte, Backyard Revolu­ tion, pp. 210-22, Max, Direct Action Organizing, pp. 2-3 and Campaign for Human Development, "Technical Assis­ tance Provided in the Area of Community Organizing" (Washington, D.C., July 1982) (mimeographed) for list­ ings of training and resource centers. 0 Interview with Earle Warner, Director, Western Action Training Institute, Salt Lake City, 10 September 1982. 9The description . . . of community organizing presen­ ted is derived form the author's organizing experience, a reading of the literature footnoted in this chapter and from an interview with Dan Lopp, Director, Western Action Training Institute, Salt Lake City, 3 April 1981; and Warner interview. 10Max, Direct Action Organizing, pp. 3, 6. ^Kahn's How People Get Power is the major source for the depiction of the steps in the organizing process along with the author's own participation in and obser­ vation of organizing situations. 12 James David . . . . . Barber, Citizen Politics: An Intro­ duction to Political Behavior (Chicago: Markham Publish­ ing Co., 1969), p. 192. "^Included in the development of this section were an interview with Dick Lodmell, Lead Organizer, Western Action Training Institute, Denver, Colorado, 15 May 198 0; Lopp interview; and Kahn, How People Get Power, pp. 48, 52, for discussion of the self-governance feature. ■ 14 . Trapp, Dynamics of Organizing, p. 19. ^~*The description of public communication given is derived from the author’s own observation and experi­ ence and upon a combination of the references incorpor­ ated in this study. Research for the study indicates the notion of public communication is a unique and undeveloped part of the communication field. Somewhat more developed, is the concept of "political communication," which encompasses the various aspects of communication within the politi­ cal sphere. One source, Dan D. Nimmo and Keith R. 32 Sanders, editors, Handbook of Political Communication (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1981), provides a comprehensive introduction to political communication and may serve as a reference for further development of the public communication notion. 16 Used in the development of public communication in community organizing was Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, "Communication," pp. 80-97, for analysis of effective communication in organizing; Kahn, pp. 1-47, on the need for strong interpersonal communication; Alan Lipsky, "Protest as a Political Resource," American Political Science Review, on external appeals to third parties; Lopp interview and Warner interview on feedback and the value of a positive self image; and the author's parti­ cipant observation in organizing situations. 17The practice of public communication described is derived from Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, pp. 80-97, Kahn, How People Get Power, pp. 1-47, Lodmell interview, and the author's experience as communications advisor to community groups and individuals engaged in the commu­ nity organizing process. 18 Primary sources for description of participant roles in public communication were interviews with Lod­ mell, Lopp and Warner for the resident role; interview with Richard Male, Director, Community Resources, Inc., Denver, 13 June 198 0, on the community support group; Kahn's How People Get Power, the entire book; and Trapp, Dynamics of Organizing, pp. 22-26, on the organizer's role. 19For an analysis of public relations in social work see Encyclopedia of Social Work, 1971 ed., s.v. "Public Relations," by Melvin Glasser. Public relations references used in the develop­ ment of this section include Allan H. Center and Frank E. Walsh, Public Relations Practices: Case Studies, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1981), pp. 1-18; Raymond Simon, Public Relations Con­ cepts and Practices (Columbus, Ohio: Grid Publishing, 1980); Charles S. Steinburg, Public Relations: The Crea­ tion of Consent (New York: Hastings House, 1975). III. THE LARK UTAH CASE STUDY "It's a helluva Christmas present," an oldtime resident snorted. And it was. Eleven days before Christmas, 14 December 1977, Kennecott Copper Corporation, the world's copper giant, told the 5 91 residents of Lark, Utah, they were being forced out of their homes, homes some of them had lived in for over fifty years. A town meeting was held the night of 14 December in the LDS Church recreation hall in Lark. Sorran A. Barrett, a Kennecott engineer, and Keith Taylor, an at­ torney from a downtown Salt Lake City law firm, were sent by Kennecott to announce that the company had bought the town and the residents would have to leave by 31 August 1978 or earlier. Lark residents were shocked. Most of them had thought they could live there for another fifteen years, until 19 92, when Kennecott had an agreement with the owner, UV Industries, Inc., to assume control of the town and the mining properties adjacent to it.^ But in November 1977 the two companies agreed Kennecott would assume immediate and complete control, which meant ownership of seventy-nine rental houses and 34 apartment units, and the land under approximately fifty . other houses owned by individuals and families. 2 Continued operation of the mining town was not what Kennecott had in mind. "The policy of Kennecott Copper Corporation has been to go out of the housing business. the house or land business. It is not in Therefore, no leases will be renewed that now are in effect," Sorran Barrett, the . mining engineer, said. 3 Barrett, according to one account, " . . . told the stunned assembly that Kennecott would not buy any of the homes and would not pay moving expenses. . . . "Then he sat silent beside a company lawyer [Taylor] and refused to speak." Mrs. Lillian Miller, who with her husband Leonard ran the town's only store for nineteen years before they both retired to live in Lark, recalled: "It was just that blunt . . . In less than five minutes we were told there was no more Lark and we could 4 get off the property." More questions were asked about what the company planned to do with the land, would residents be compen­ sated for improvements made on their places, and weren't the leases good until 1992 as many of the residents thought. Neither the engineer nor the lawyer gave any 35 answers. Leona Peterson, a seventy-five-year-old woman who lived in Lark fifty-five years, said, "They were asked questions and they sat there like they didn't hear them. Instead of saying 'No remarks' they just sat there like dumbbells."5 The announcement meeting lasted about thirty minutes. Residents were restrained, but their emotions ran strong. . . . Many elderly persons sat quietly, some with quivering lips and tears in their eyes. Ten­ sion filled the auditorium . . . "You have us over a barrel," Bob Bardsley, a Lark resident, told the Kennecott representatives conducting the Wednesday meeting. "It's amusing to see how these big companies work. Once we're no longer needed, all of us are out." Hilda Grabner, an eighty-one-year-old widow and a forty-nine-year resident of Lark, asked, "Doesn't it mean something to Kennecott that the people here are going to be reduced to nothing? . . . It isn't easy to pick up stakes and start over somewhere . else. Kennecott should do something in a humanitar­ ian way for these people." Lark residents who anticipated the nature of the 14 December meeting had notified the Salt Lake news media the same day. Once the Kennecott closure of Lark was announced it became a major local and national news story. A flood of inquiries filled the Kennecott office in Salt Lake City. "The CBS, NBC, ABC Los Angeles bureaus were here the following day along with corres­ pondents from Time, the New York Times, Business Week, the wire services and all the local media, we were 36 swamped," said Ken Kefauver, Director of Community Affairs for Kennecott's Utah Division at the time. "We were all astounded and shocked. 7 Not so much by the announcement itself but by the way it was made," said Kefauver. Both the engineer and lawyer sent by Kennecott were "excellent" people, he said, "but not the type you send into that kind of situation." Kefauver wasn't the only company official sur­ prised by the story of the announcement. Ed Dowell, Communication Director for the Kenne­ cott Copper Company Minerals Division headquartered in New York City, called Kefauver wanting to know " . . . what the hell is going on out there . . . " Dowell was in the dark, Kefauver recalled, and the national corpo­ rate headquarters was alarmed. Apparently not many persons within Kennecott knew of company plans for Lark. According to Kefauver, upon learning about the closing "third hand" he called Utah General Manager Bob Pratt to find out what was happen­ ing. When Kefauver finally reached Pratt early the morning after the announcement, he asked Pratt why the public relations staff, including himself, had not been informed and involved in the announcement. Pratt told his community affairs director he saw the Lark situation as an internal company matter and had 37 handled it that way, and assigned Barrett and Taylor to make the announcement without conferring with any­ one else. Kefauver said Pratt indicated to him at the time the announcement was in keeping with the industry prac­ tice for closing mining towns such as Bingham and others in which Kennecott had been involved. The next day on the morning of 15 December Kefauver and upper management staff met with Pratt. "We told him, Mr. Pratt, you have a problem and this company is in deep trouble." Mr. Pratt said, "What do you mean?" "Lark," Kefauver told him. Kefauver explained to the general manager that "No one— even your office— knows what in the hell is going on in Lark." "It was time to tell our story in the simplest and fullest manner," Kefauver recalled. Pratt agreed. A position paper was drawn up and a news conference called for 8:00 A.M. the following day. "Kennecott is not Scrooge, nor trying to be the Grinch that stole Christmas," Pratt told a full contin­ gent of national and local news reporters gathered for the news conference in the Kennecott Building in downO town Salt Lake City. Pratt said Kennecott made its announcement " . . . not to deliver bad news but to deliver reassurance." "We have absolutely no intention of not doing right by the people who live in Lark," Pratt told re­ porters and said he ". . . deplored reports that made the company appear to be evicting the 591 residents just before Christmas." Rumors had been circulating through the town that the company intended to evict residents by 1 January, he said. "We wanted them to have a good Christmas and allay their fears. It was important to stop the rumors." Since Kennecott had not studied the leases of Lark residents and didn't know their individual needs, company officials could not give any information on what help the company might offer, he said. "As far as monetary commitments are concerned, until we look at each case, we can't say what we can do," Pratt said. "Kennecott will not pledge financial assistance to the dislocated in Lark," he said, "But it will con­ sider each case on its circumstance and will introduce residents to outside sources of help. "Any houses purchased," he said, "will be on the basis of market conditions and independent appraisals. 39 This was done when Kennecott bought up the private homes and land at Bingham to make way for road expansion more than a decade ago." Pratt explained the company did not want to be in the housing business and needed the ground under Lark for potential mining development. Kennecott had successfully closed or was closing other "company" towns such as Santa Rita, New Mexico; Ray, Arizona; Ruth, Nevada: and Copperton, Bingham and Garfield, Utah, he told the reporters, and they had every intention of doing the same in Lark. As to asking residents to evacuate, Pratt said, "There's no question we're within our legal rights." Pratt predicted, "I think when it's all said and done and you have the opportunity to come back, say a year from today, I think you'll find a majority of these people are very, very happy." A story carried the day after Pratt's news con­ ference said Lark residents knew their leases were not permanent. UV Industries, which owned the Lark townsite and mining operation before Kennecott, had maintained the town and its residents in recognition for its "valued employees and retired people." 9 The UV Lark mines shut down in 1971 and for seven years residents were told their leases were for only one year at a time, the story said, and added that residents owning their homes leased land from the company for $2.50 to $7.50 a month and renters of company housing units paid $65 to $95. Don Willie, general superintendent of the Lark mines for UV Inc., said that it was UV company policy that " . . . any who have leased or rented in recent years were advised of the shadow hanging over [the] term of the lease."10 Over the following months much of the concern over the closing of Lark centered on the assumption that residents— especially older residents— had at least until 1992 before their leases expired. Kennecott was called upon time and again to honor the presumed obliga­ tion of UV Inc. to the 1992 date. Residents Respond Within a few days after the Kennecott announce­ ment Lark residents began to meet informally to discuss what they could do about things. Donna Bardsley, who with her husband Bob had lived in Lark since 1952 and raised their five children there, took an active role in scheduling a town meeting for December 22, when residents could get together and discuss the situation. "Many of us felt we needed to come together and talk things out and make some plans if we could," 41 Mrs. Bardsley recalled. "Everyone was pretty angry at first, but after a while we knew if we were going to get anywhere we had to meet and talk it over so we started talking about having some meetings to do this," she said.^ Many of Bardsley's neighbors were upset and un­ certain. Leona Peterson said at the time, "We just feel they've pulled the rug out from underneath us. I haven't made any plans as yet, but I'm not leaving until I see what they [Kennecott] intend to do." 12 Outside Interest Concern over Lark began to work its way through the Salt Lake Valley community networks. Attending a senior citizen get-together in an­ other part of the Salt Lake Valley, Tim Funk of the Utah State Coalition of Senior Citizens, a senior activist organization, encountered Michael Martinez, whose mother lived on the fringe of the Lark townsite. Martinez, who grew up in Lark and was then an attorney with the State Attorney General's office, told Funk he was involved in the situation and he thought the Senior Coalition should see what it could do. He said a meeting was scheduled in Lark on Wednesday and urged Funk to attend. Funk paid little heed to the solicitation, saying his organi­ zation already had plenty to handle."^ 42 On the day before the next meeting Funk received two more comments from community activists concerned about Lark. S. I. Lester, field representative of the National Council of Senior Citizens, a former state legislator and a retired Kennecott union man, called Funk at the Senior Coalition office and said he was up­ set about how Kennecott was "kicking those old people out up there." Lester said he knew some of the people living there, that he had worked with them or knew their widows, and he wanted to see what he could do, if any­ thing. Funk responded by saying that he didn't know if the Senior Coalition had any role to play there. Lester replied, "If old people are there and they're being hurt in any way the Coalition should look into it." In turn, Funk conferred with Richard Male, Direc­ tor of Salt Lake's Crossroads Urban Center, about Lark. Male said he had just spoken to Pastor Eldon Michelson of the United Methodist Church in Midvale, Utah, a town midway between Lark and downtown Salt Lake City. Male said the Pastor's congregation included an older couple in Lark that he was very concerned about and was there anything Male could do. As director of the Crossroads Center, which was supported largely with money from local Christian churches, Male worked closely with Pastor Michelson and 43 other clergy on local social issues. Male wondered out loud with Funk as to whether anyone was doing anything in Lark. Funk told Male he had talked to both Martinez and Lester, who had encouraged further inquiry. 14 With this background Funk attended the residents meeting on Wednesday, 22 December, exactly one week after the announcement. The second town meeting was also held in the Lark LDS Ward recreation hall, the only place large enough to hold the 200 or more residents in attendance. Residents heard primarily from two persons, Ed Mayne, President, Utah AFL-CIO, and Michael Martinez, the native son then working for the Utah Attorney General. Mayne pledged his support and unity for the resi­ dents. He was a former Lark resident, he said, and still had family living there. He encouraged the resi­ dents to take a unified stand and make Kennecott live up to its obligations. Mayne told the residents that he would support them in whatever they decided to do. "If you want to fight Kennecott we'll stand with you," he pledged.^ Martinez, who by this time had assumed a key role in pulling the residents together, ran the meeting for the most part. As a former local boy who was now a law- 44 yer, he was seen by many residents as someone who might know what to do. Martinez urged the residents to form an official town committee made up of six members, three represent­ ing homeowners and three representing renters. Those present accepted the idea and nominated a slate of names. Bob Bardsley, Leonard Miller and Dick Powers were elected to represent homeowners, and Dick Rubright, Charlie Gallegos and Patricia Sanchez elected to represent renters. Rubright was chosen committee president. 16 Martinez told the Lark residents the new commit­ tee would deal with Kennecott on their behalf and that he and others would serve as volunteer legal counsel. Although many questions were asked for which Martinez and the newly elected committee members admit­ tedly had no answers, no attempt was made to determine what the residents needed or wanted to do as a town. Anger and emotions were obvious, yet no effort was made to gather any collective opinion from the residents, no position was established of any kind. Looking for a way to express their anger over the Kennecott announcement, several Lark residents led by Bob and Donna Bardsley arranged a media event to drama­ tize their frustration. Residents, including members of the newly elected 45 town committee, called a Christmas Eve news conference in Lark at the Bardsley home. "They [Kennecott] gave us such a nice Christmas present. We thought we'd let them know we're not just sitting back and forgetting about it," explained Donna Bardsley. She and her neighbors created a Christmas card they sent to the company depicting it as a gigantic Santa Claus stepping on the houses of Lark and carrying the residents in the bag on his back while laughing, "Ho, Ho, Ho, Ho, Ho."17 * The card carried the message "Good will to men" and was signed by approximately one hundred residents. Charlie Gallegos, renter representative on the town committee, agreed with the card's message. case of big business squashing a small town. should have been warned. "It's a I feel we When they tell us we must pick up and move overnight, we aren't prepared," he said, adding it would cost $4000-$5000 to move each Lark , home.18 Leonard Miller, another long-time resident and town committee member, said, "All they've told us is that we can move our houses." 19 Despite these strong protestations in the Christ­ mas Eve news conference, the town committee said it would approach the company with a statement requesting them "to see if Kennecott will be a good neighbor and 46 assist us by giving fair value for the homes [owned by ground lessees] and not low prices since homes in Lark are not worth anything anymore." By now the response to the town closing was de­ veloping two opinions among residents: one condemning the company for its harsh, arbitrary action, and the other pleading to the company to be fair and kind to the residents whose homes were now worthless. In addition, most comment at this point was con­ ducted on behalf of homeowners; renters were not men­ tioned as a concern. The separation of homeowner and renter concerns was a split inherent in the makeup of Lark's population and its history. 20 After Christmas A New Season Begins After the Christmas season media coverage of the Lark story died down somewhat. There were the inevi­ table accounts in the local media about the "Last Yule in Lark," but by the first of the year the national media representatives were gone and the local coverage had tapered off to only an occasional follow-up blurb or article. Reporters from other cities came during the first week after the announcement and their stories began to appear in other parts of the country, in newspapers like the Detroit Free Press and the Minneapolis Tribune. Residents continued to be interviewed by reporters from national magazines such as Us and People and by correspondents for foreign publications. 21 As the Lark story unfolded over the next several months, the inquiry from the oustide never ceased until residents moved out. This constant attention made some of the residents acutely aware of their special position in the public eye and their access to the media. Bob Bardsley, homeowner and town committee mem­ ber, recalled a phone interview that "got me to thinking.1,22 "This here reporter called from an East German or West German newspaper, I'm not sure which it was, and was asking me questions about what was going on in town. "Then he asked me how I felt about this whole thing considering how President Carter was making such a big thing out of the human rights issue. Well, I told him I hadn't thought about it that way but then I did. "In fact, I brought it up with the town committee and said we should be challenging Kennecott for taking our human rights. I told the committee the issue was bigger than just Lark. "The committee wouldn't buy it. scared. They were Leonard Miller said it would be going too far and it might make Kennecott angry," Bardsley said. 48 Two Fronts Form in Lark After the first of January, as local and national news media coverage of Lark quieted down, activity on the community level was taking shape on two fronts. On one front Kennecott was establishing itself in Lark setting up an office, assigning staff and meeting with the elected town committee. On another front sev­ eral Salt Lake area community groups from outside of Lark were searching for ways of becoming more involved, if necessary, and meeting with residents to see what their needs were. In a letter to Lark residents the company on 5 January announced the opening of a Lark office. J. E. "Gene" Petersen, Kennecott employee relations director, a former Lark resident, union president and a veteran of many company/labor battles, was assigned to run the field operation. Company officials said the office was set up to enable residents of the town to tell the com­ pany their relocation problems. General Manager Bob Pratt said in the letter to residents: "Our interest is to make an appointment with every family so that we might learn what problems you face in moving to another location." 2 3 Assignment of Gene Petersen as the company repre­ sentative in Lark, and the decision to interview each household individually, were perhaps the two most impor­ 49 tant factors working for Kennecott as opposition to the company's handling of the Lark situation developed over the next five months. Petersen was a one-time union official and or­ ganizer who had also worked a long time for the company. He knew both sides of the bargaining table. Just as important was that Petersen had grown up in Lark, his mother had run the boarding house for the mining company and he was a friend or acquaintance of most of the 24 town's older residents. Interviewing each household separately would pro­ vide Petersen with the opportunity to talk personally with the main figures in each household, to quiet their fears and massage their good feelings. In the words of Ed Mayne of the AFL-CIO, Petersen was "tough, smart, charming and ruthless if he had to be. . Lark." 25 cott's ass in He saved Kenne- After the Christmas Eve news conference, the town committee went silent. Committee members made no more deliberate public statements and the committee as a body took no formal action. By the time the town committee held its first official meeting with Petersen on 16 January he had al­ ready conferred individually several times with most of them, especially Dick Rubright, the chairman, and Leonard Miller, both key figures in the community. 26 50 Bob Bardsley, who was also approached informally by Petersen, said, " . . . Rubright. Petersen got to Miller and They were company men to start with so it wasn't hard. Miller ran the company store in Lark for twenty years or something and Rubright worked as a geol­ ogist for both UV and Kennecott; they were company men 27 and weren't gonna push Kennecott." Bardsley also says, "I think Petersen got to Mike Martinez, too. After he got us started and we elected the committee and got some press coverage and Mike helped us with all that, things stopped. We weren't going anywhere, we had no plan, we weren't organizing anything. " Bardsley says neither Rubright or Miller were much concerned about the problems of the renters. Rubright and Miller later both said they were mostly concerned about the older residents in Lark. When Petersen assured them their own needs would be met and that the elderly would be taken car of, Rubright and Miller saw little purpose in pushing for the whole town. By their own admission and in the opinion of Bardsley and others, Miller and Rubright saw most of the renters as interlopers who had moved into Lark after the • mines closed to take advantage of the low rents there. 28 Petersen further neutralized the town committee by hiring Pat Sanchez, one of the renter representatives 51 on the elected town committee, as the secretary in the newly opened Lark office. With Sanchez in-house, Peter­ sen had direct access to information about what the com­ mittee and the renters in particular were saying or ^ ■ 29 doing. The town committee met officially with Petersen on 16 January and simply agreed to encourage residents to come to the Lark office for their interviews. The committee held a town meeting two days later and advised the residents that " . . . KCC won't be able to reach a decision until all interviews are completed. . . . Once all interviews are completed we will again meet with KCC for their decision."^ By the end of January thirty-two homeowners out of sixty and eleven renters out of seventy had been interviewed by Petersen and Kennecott. Outsiders Coming In: The Second Front As Kennecott proceeded much as Pratt had origi­ nally outlined on 16 December, things were happening within Lark and the Salt Lake community which would eventually bring the Lark situation into sharp national focus. After Utah Senior Citizen Coalition director Tim Funk attended the Lark town meeting at which the town committee was elected, he was still unclear as to what 52 role, if any, outside interests might play. It appeared that the situation, while unfortunate, was being taken care of as well as it could be. In response to Pastor Micholsen's concern over the elderly couple from his congregation, Funk and Cross­ roads Center director Richard Male met with the Pastor just before the end of December. The Pastor said he was worried because the townspeople didn't seem to have any direction or know what they were doing. He was also concerned, he said, because most of the old people there couldn't afford to move and there were a lot of poor younger people in the same fix. With Micholsen's approval, Funk and Male went to Lark to discuss the situation with the older couple. After meeting with them it was still unclear that fur­ ther involvement was necessary. Later the same day Male and Funk met with Cammy Dunn, director of the South County Community Action Program in Midvale. The South County program served Lark because of the high number of low income residents there and South County staff had already been assigned there to see what help they could provide. Dunn told Funk and Male she was bothered by the absence of any effort to unite the town at the election meeting, but that her main concern was how to help the low income renters. She said she was trying to get 53 whatever public or private program services she could and would be working with Kennecott to see what could be done. She said there was not an effort to organize any of the residents in Lark and wasn't sure there should be. Later, Funk and Male discussed their meetings with the pastor, the residents, and Dunn, and decided to look further into the situation. On the day following the meeting with Dunn, Funk got a second call from S. I. Lester, the National Council of Senior Citizens Utah representative. Lester said after talking with both Ed Mayne from the AFL-CIO and some of the retired union people in Lark he was more concerned than before. He thought Kennecott would try to get out of Lark as cheap­ ly as they could, just like they had in other towns they closed. He said the old people were being kicked out, and from what he and Mayne could see not much was being done about it. Lester further related that Mayne was talking privately with Kennecott and he [Mayne] sensed no com­ pany intention to help renters. Mayne was also bothered by the way the election meeting was held without any effort to pull residents together. 31 Funk told Lester that he and Male were still looking into what could be done. Funk mentioned to Lester that the Western Action Training Institute, a 54 group sponsored by Crossroads Urban Center, had just received a grant from the Roman Catholic Bishop's Cam­ paign for Human Development. The grant to Western Action was for training resident leaders in communities impacted by energy and resource development. He wasn't sure, Funk said, when Western Action was starting its project or if they would be interested in working in Lark, but he would inquire. Lester was supportive and expressed the possibility that a full­ time labor-type organizer should be assigned to Lark. Richard Male and Funk then contacted Paul Carpino and Dan Lopp, main figures in the formation of Western Action Training Institute. Carpino said the first meet­ ing of Western Action's project board was some ten days later on 7 January and no decisions could be made until then. Carpino volunteered that Dan Lopp make a visit to Lark to evaluate the potential for working there. Funk and Male gladly agreed and Lopp made his visit the first week of January. Lopp, a community organizer for ten years in ur­ ban and rural communities in Utah, Montana and South Dakota, came to Salt Lake City from his home in Montana. On his evaluation visit he talked to as many key figures in the Lark situation as he could. Together with Funk and on his own, he went to Lark, talked to what resi­ dents he could on the street and in the post office and 55 the local bar, the only two public places still open in town. He also contacted the outside figures including Pastor Micholsen, Ed Mayne, S. I. Lester, Cammy Dunn, Mike Martinez and the local Catholic Pastor, Father Thomas McNicholas. At the Western Action board meeting on 7 January in Salt Lake City, Lopp reported the Lark situation as he saw it. After talking with all of the people he could and observing what was happening, Lopp told his board that the Lark people were "being sold out." 32 "The CAP [Community Action Program] and other people are up there talking about public housing, ser­ vices, and what handouts people can get. The CAP atti­ tude is 'everybody has to get out as fast as you can.1 "The Lark people I talked to are asking, about 1992?' 'What They feel something is being taken away from them and CAP is missing that altogether." Lopp reported he sensed a strong feeling against Kennecott and the closing but nothing was being done to help the resident get involved in deciding what was hap­ pening. The elected committee, he said, at that point was not pursuing any course of action and there were concerns expressed by some renters that they would be left out by Kennecott. Lopp observed that the town committee and its backers, by remaining silent and waiting for Kennecott 56 to make a decision, had lost the ability to put public pressure on the company. They had lost the initiative to Kennecott and it would be hard to win it back, Lopp surmised. Community Organizer Assigned With Lopp's recommendation the Western Action board decided to place an organizer in Lark as soon as possible. Rich Tuttle, a Salt Lake native who had worked with Rich Male at the Crossroads Urban Center and more recently with Lopp organizing farmers in Montana, was assigned to Lark starting the next week. Tuttle was to work in Lark as long as residents there expressed a need to question Kennecott actions. South County CAP, in an attempt to serve the Lark residents, arranged a town meeting and potluck dinner for 12 January at the Lark Lions Club Hall. South County invited residents to come and hear from social service program representatives about what options were available to them. It was the first general town meeting since elec­ tions for the town committee were held on 21 December. Some dozen representatives of different social services and community groups were present, ready to tell the townspeople about the social services available. After hearing about public housing, legal assistance and the 57 availability of other social programs, the discussion which was loosely led by South County's Cammy Dunn turned towards Kennecott. The townspeople had obviously resigned themselves to the idea of closing the town and moving out, but for the first time in a month they were asking questions in public about what Kennecott was going to do. Their questions were the same as those the night of the Kenne­ cott announcement: was the company going to pay for the homes and how much, how could the old people afford to move, what about the improvements residents had made on their homes, and where did the renters fit into things? There were also questions about what the commit­ tee was doing: were they meeting with Kennectott, when would they tell the town what was going on, had Kenne­ cott decided anything? Eventually the meeting dragged on to the point where the few remaining residents became the audience for an assortment of characters from different Salt Lake based groups who came to tell residents how to get to­ gether and overwhelm Kennecott. One person, a sometime feminist activist and food co-op coordinator from Salt Lake's Central City, rose to give a strident testimonial as to how no one had to move if they didn't want to. In unity there was strength, she told the handful of people left. She knew, she 58 said, because the feminist movement she was a part of was built on unity. Dan Lopp, who attended the meeting with Rich Tuttle and Tim Funk, sighed out loud at the girl's plea for unity. on his face. She heard Lopp and saw the exasperated look Later, as the meeting broke up, she con­ fronted Lopp in the back of the hall. "Why did you ridicule me like that?" she asked. "Because this isn't the time or place for a plea for feminist unity," Lopp responded. "These people want to know how they can get some money to replace their homes. They don't care about your need for unity." "You don't think I should be here, do you?" she challenged. "I don't care if you're here or not," Lopp said. . "I just know a woman can't organize a mining town." 33 Community Organizing Begins It was mid-January. Kennecott had quieted the town somewhat, had set up a field office manned by Gene Petersen; the town committee was silent; public aware­ ness of the issue had been reduced to an occasional feature story in the news; and the only outside group with staff in Lark, the South County CAP, was busy help­ ing people locate social services. No concerted effort was being made to bring resi- 59 dents together and let them decide for themselves what they wanted to d o . Rich Tuttle of Western Action began his organiz­ ing efforts at this point. He first gathered the en­ dorsements and pledges of active support from the commu­ nity groups and individuals who supported his presence in Lark. These included the Crossroads Urban Center, Midvale United Methodist Church, Utah AFL-CIO, National Council of Senior Citizens, the Utah Senior Citizens Coalition, and, to an extent, the South County CAP. Through these community groups Tuttle gained some degree of legitimacy which would help him as he entered Lark and began making contact with the residents. After working out a tentative arrangement to work with South County CAP Community workers Myrna Guurber and Betty Ortiz, Tuttle moved into the Lark Lions Club recreation hall where South County was stationed. "The rec hall was a good place to start," Tuttle said later. center. "It had become something of an information Kennecott used it in the beginning to conduct the interviews, the social services people and senior legal services people were working there too, so a lot of residents were coming through. I got a chance to . meet ten or twelve residents the first two days. 34 "Leonard Miller and Dick Rubright came to the hall and we got to talking. We had an argument over the 60 expectations for Kennecott. They said the company had no responsibilities to the town and I said it might be a good idea to talk with the other residents and find out what they thought. I told them there were some resi­ dents who weren't so convinced Kennecott didn't owe them something." Rubright, elected to represent renters on the town committee, invited Tuttle to come to his home later the same day to talk some m o r e . "Instead of talking he lectured me on democracy. He was angry and said the homeowner position was jeopar­ dized by the renters. He was concerned that if the town committee, especially the homeowners on it, advocated for the renters, the homeowners would get less. He felt the renters didn't deserve anything anyway," Tuttle recalls. For the next few days Tuttle went door-to-door in Lark talking to as many residents as he could. "The response was varied. It was a month after the announcement and people were still shocked and they had no idea of what to do," Tuttle recalled.3^ Past Experience of the Organizers When the Lark mines closed in 1971, the Cross­ roads Urban Center had assigned two staff members to Lark to see if anything could be done. Efforts there 61 were largely unsuccessful because many of the long-time residents who were employable moved to other places where they could find work. Many of the homes vacated after the shutdown in turn were occupied by renters, those now being evicted by the Kennecott closure. One of the Crossroads staff in Lark at the time was Dick Lodmell, who was the person primarily respon­ sible for getting Rich Tuttle into community organizing work. Lodmell and Tuttle worked together for a time at Crossroads. One person who had been helpful to Lodmell's earlier efforts in Lark was Father Thomas Sullivan, the Catholic pastor serving Copperton, Bingham and Lark when the Lark mine closed. Father Sullivan was in Bingham Canyon when Kennecott closed that town in 19 60. Tuttle contacted Father Sullivan, who was now pastor in Tooele, Utah, some thirty miles from Salt Lake City. He explained his organizing mission in Lark and asked Sullivan to talk to the present pastor, Father James McNicholas, which Sullivan did. Father McNicholas was already being asked what to do by his Lark parishioners and Father Sullivan's word of support for Tuttle came at the right time. McNicholas made the Lark Catholic Church hall available to Tuttle and the residents he was working with almost from the beginning. 62 Talking With the Residents By the first part of February, about two weeks after he arrived in Lark, Tuttle was talking with a small group of "a dozen or so" residents, most of them renters. One couple, Elaine and Bernie Trujillo, were instrumental in forming the nucleus of the group. Elaine, who lived close to the rec hall where Tuttle was working, listened to what he had to say about get­ ting people together and talking things over. Dissatis­ fied with what was happening, she started urging Bernie, her husband, to talk to Tuttle some more. 37 Bernie and Elaine were Catholics. When they found out Tuttle and Western Action were funded through a Catholic Church program, it helped them to accept him. In fact, it was the Trujillos who talked to Father McNicholas and arranged the first meetings for Tuttle at the Catholic Church hall. Bernie and Elaine were fairly typical of the renters in Lark. Both of them had lived and grown up in Lark; their families had lived there since the 1930s. After the Lark mine closed down, the Trujillos moved back to Lark to raise their three young children and to take advantage of the low rents. They paid $95 a month for a modest but roomy house. With Bernie working nearby as a miner for the 63 Anaconda Company and Elaine running the family home and caring for the kids, the Trujillos were happy with their life in Lark. Hilda Grabner was a close neighbor of the Truijillos. Like them, she was a Catholic and shared much time with them. Hilda and the Trujillos exchanged visits and favors. In Hilda, Bernie and Elaine and their children had something of a grandmother figure. They talked and listened and shared their lives with each other every day. 38 A fifty-year resident of Lark, Hilda was like many of the older persons there. had come to Lark to work and live. With her husband she UV Inc., the origi­ nal mining company, had encouraged their employees to live in Lark, to build their homes there on company land, and to raise their families there. When retire­ ment came, the company allowed their employees to con­ tinue living in Lark, and widows, like Hilda Grabner, were looked after. Hilda wanted nothing more than to live out her years in Lark. She lived alone, independent and satis­ . . fied with the small house she owned and kept. 39 When Rich Tuttle entered Lark and began organiz­ ing, Mrs. Grabner and the Trujillos knew they wanted to do something if they could; Tuttle simply defined the opportunity. 64 The Seeds of Organized Opposition After about two weeks of hanging around at the Lions' rechall, going door-to-door, and talking individ­ ually with numerous individual residents and families, Tuttle had enough contacts to get a small informal resi­ dent meeting organized. With some help from South Coun­ ty staffer Betty Ortiz, he arranged an evening meeting in the Lark Catholic Church hall. Bernie and Elaine Trujillo, Hilda Grabner, Ruth Trujillo (a renter unrelated to Bernie and Elaine), Bob Bardsley, Leonard Miller, Myrtle Thomas, a fifty-year resident; Kathy Waldie, a mother with three children whose husband was unemployed, and Mary Serasio, a long­ time resident, attended. Tuttle was there as were Tim Funk of the Senior Coalition and Betty Ortiz. Conversation that evening centered on what op­ tions were available to the town. Leonard Miller thought not much more could be done, that Kennecott should be entrusted with the residents' future. Others asked Tuttle and Funk if anything could be done. Tuttle re­ counted stories of displaced renters in Salt Lake's Central City neighborhood and westside areas who had been compensated when forced to move. Fair agreements had been reached, Tuttle said, but only after the people had organized themselves and taken a stand. Halfway through the meeting Leonard Miller 65 politely excused himself, saying he just couldn't see much reason in staying. Bob Bardsley, a homeowner representative on the town committee, told the gathering he would like to see Kennecott pay as much as he could but the only way to do that was with a united front. He said the town needed "the prestige of an elected committee to get anything," and that they needed to stick with the committee already elected. In response, the renters present said they didn't feel like the committee was representing them, at least they didn't know if they were because the committee wasn't telling the townspeople anything. When asked when the committee was going to start making demands on Kennecott, Bardsley said he didn't know when or if the committee could. Tuttle observed that the committee seemed to have no direction and they had no way of making the company respond to the town or the committee. Tuttle suggested an effort be made to get State Representative Dix Holt McMullin, whose district encompassed Lark, to sponsor a legislative resolution supporting the Lark residents' struggle. The public needed to be aware that nothing was happening and the resolution was one way of renewing interest, Tuttle said. This idea was endorsed and a resolution was prepared by Funk. Representative 66 McMullin agreed to sponsor it, but after several revi­ sions it was killed at the wish of the residents when it turned out to be overly laudatory of Kennecott. 40 With this first meeting at the Catholic hall, the organized opposition to Kennecott's closing of Lark was born. Nothing official was formed, simply a group of like-minded residents got together and voiced their con­ cerns. From the meeting came the sense that Kennecott was not clear enough about its intentions, the elected town committee was not representing the residents— the renters in particular— and the town must stand united if anything was to be accomplished with Kennecott. For Hilda Grabner the meeting marked the begin­ ning of the organized opposition. "Up to that time I had decided to go it alone if I had to," she remembered. "I'd lay awake at night that first month thinking about what Kennecott could do, what the company would do, what they had done before. qualms, great qualms. I had The company had done it three times before and the people had not resisted." 41 Hilda was a leading force as the resistance to Kennecott formed. During those first weeks she talked to many of the townspeople, people like the Truijillos, other Catholic parishioners and the other miners' widows. They called her often, she recounts, wondering what to do, where to go. 67 "I said I wasn't going to move; we've got to fight. We'd talk about holding a meeting, of getting together, of trying to do something." They did not come together until that first meeting at the Catholic Church hall and even then Mrs. Grabner had her doubts about Rich Tuttle and get­ ting organized. "I wasn't too sure of Rich. he was. I didn't know who I was polite and proper, of course, but I held back— you know what I mean." Tuttle came to see Mrs. Grabner after the first meeting and when he arrived Mrs. Grabner was busy trying to fix her clock. It was a cuckoo clock and Rich offered to fix it. He was working with it when Dick Rubright stopped by. Rubright, the president of the elected town com­ mittee and a renter representative, was trying to per­ suade Mrs. Grabner to go down to the Kennecott Lark office for her interview with Gene Petersen. Over the years Rubright and Hilda had a pleasant, not unwarm association with each other, and Rubright knew Hilda was well thought of by the older Lark residents. "I think Dick thought if I went for my interview then I could come back and tell the others about it and maybe encourage them to go down. 68 When Rubright discovered Tuttle at Hilda's working on her clock, . . his whole attitude and manner changed," Hilda says. businesslike and left. Rubright stiffened, became This change surprised her, she said, and was something of a turning point in her ac­ ceptance of Tuttle and what he was trying to do. Before the Lark announcement, Hilda was a main source of stability in Lark's senior citizen community network. When a worried widow called her, asking for consolation, what Hilda said carried a great deal of credibility and was respected. listen to her and her advice. The older persons would After the town closing was announced and residents began to organize, Hilda's acceptance of Tuttle and her involvement in the effort brought it a legitimacy it needed to proceed. 43 Renters Come Together February 197 8 proved to be a tumultuous month. Since Christmas things in Lark had been rather slow moving but by the first of February Tuttle's work had managed to spawn some organized resistance which would continue to grow. On the first of February, Dick Rubright as presi­ dent of the town committee reported "good news and bad news" in the Lark Newsletter produced by the South Salt Lake CAP with help from the Utah AFL-CIO. The good news 69 was that all but one of the fifty-one homeowners had been interviewed; the bad news was that only twenty-one of seventy-two renters had been interviewed. Renters weren't calling in to the Kennecott office for their interviews, he reported. KCC appraisers would start evaluating homes the first two weeks of February, Rubright said, and ". . . all the interviews and appraisals must be completed be­ fore KCC will give us a definite answer on our problems. We have nothing to lose by cooperation." The next town meeting would be "as soon as the interviews were com­ pleted . . . At that time the offers from KCC can be compared and analyzed." 44 In spite of this report to the community Tuttle continued to organize. By obtaining the confidence of Hilda and the Trujillos, Tuttle apparently tapped into both the older homeowners through Mrs. Grabner and the younger, mostly Spanish surname renters through Bernie and Elaine. outward. Through them the organizing effort spread They talked with their neighbors and friends and fellow parishioners, got the Catholic Church hall and arranged for more meetings. The first week of February a flyer circulated in Lark declaring in part: WE HAVE RIGHTS, ATTENTION RENTERS There will be a meeting on February 6 at 70 Catholic Church hall at 7:00 PM. There will be an expert to explain RENTERS RIGHTS and what you can., expect from Kennecott for forced relocation . . . As the flyer circulated through town Bernie and Elaine, Ruth Trujillo, Kathie Waldie, Mrs. Grabner and others talked with everyone they could about coming to the first meeting for renters. About twenty residents, almost all of them renters, were there. Tuttle arranged for Brian Barnard, a Salt Lake attorney, to speak to the renters. tion served two purposes. Barnard's participa­ First, he was a lawyer and carried the same authority or at least credibility that Mike Martinez did as an advisor to the town committee. More significantly, Barnard had successfully represented renters in relocation fights in Salt Lake City, he sup­ ported organizing activities, and he believed in getting a fair settlement for the residents. Barnard told how the renters he worked with had been successful because they did, . . . three basic things. First, they got themselves organized and stood together. Next, they decided what they wanted in terms of money or other compensation and held out for it. Finally, they took their story to the public and appealed for support through the news media.46 Renters he had represented had received around $5000 in relocation benefits, Barnard told the resi­ dents, and there were federal guidelines they could study to see what they might qualify for in Lark. 71 In the discussion that followed the Lark renters decided certain things. Because they felt renters were not being represented by Mike Martinez or the elected committee, they would seek their own legal help and form their own committee if necessary. They would find out how much it would cost to move, to relocate, and they would try to join forces with as many homeowners as possible. Because they had not formed an official group and had no funding, Barnard was asked by the protesting homeowners and renters to represent their legal inter­ ests at least unofficially. This first coming together of the Lark renters group, no matter how small or informal, represented a major step in organizing the Lark community: residents came together and discovered the common ground that would put them directly at issue with Kennecott. More than anything else the renters wanted more representation. They felt the promises of legal help or advice given to them by Mike Martinez at the initial election of the town committee had not materialized. Renters and homeowners alike felt ill-equipped to meet one-on-one with Gene Petersen, the "man" from Kennecott. For one, Bernie Trujillo's interview with Petersen convinced him the renters needed to act. He recalls the interview he and his wife Elaine had with V 72 Petersen. We went down there and Petersen talked to us and we told him what our problem was and where we stood and he took down how many [years] she'd live here and I'd lived here. And basically [he said] there really wasn't too much they could do for us and they really wasn't going to work with the renter, that they didn't feel like they owed anything to the renter up here. So I started working with Rich and Tim and got people together down here at the church and we started talking things over about what this other committee was doing for us and what they weren't doing for us.^8 Unity is Difficult From the first renters meeting came the expressed need for more and better representation, for fullfledged renter advisors and a continuing call for unity between renters, homeowners and the entire community. Such unity wasn't easy to come by. In the 13 Feb­ ruary Lark Newsletter issued after the first renters meeting arranged by Tuttle, Dick Rubright responded to the growing renter unrest by inviting the dissatisfied to form their own committee if they so wished. Resi­ dents deciding to form their own committee could leave their names on a list at the post office and the elected town committee would no longer negotiate for them with Kennecott, he said. Residents had a week to finish their interviews, Rubright reported in the same article, and while the homeowners were completed, he said only twenty-nine of seventy-two renters were done. 49 73 In effect Rubright was telling the dissident renters even if they formed their own committee, with only one week left for interviews it was too late for any new representation to make any difference. More opinions appeared in the same 13 February Lark Newsletter expressing support for Kennecott and the elected committee and disapproval of the growing opposi.. 50 txon. Tiva Gallegos (who apparently was permanently substituted by her elected husband Charlie to serve for him as a renter representative on the elected committee) sent one letter supporting Mike Martinez as a "home town" boy who " . . . wasn't sent here by any agency ..." Her letter asked, How many of the outsiders who have been sent here to help had ever heard of Lark a year ago? . . . People are being led to believe they can pos­ sibly expect large amounts of money as renters. What a big letdown it will be for them if possibly they don't get it. Another statement entitled "THINK" warned in part: Who are these strange faces invading our Commu­ nity. They're promising us thousands of dollars in settlements. Where's the money going to come from. Are they going to give it to us? . . . Who's the guiding force behind them? . . . Think!! Another letter from Cammy Dunn of South County CAP echoed the same message. In her letter, "Beware of Strangers in Town," she denounced " . . . one gentleman, 74 Mr. Richard Tuttle . . . who has said he is working for me. . . ." Tuttle would have been working for her, she said, but he refused ". . . t o work closely with the elected committee and the rest of the residents to keep the town together." Dunn warned much the way Rubright did, ". . . i f you renters have been told not to go in for your inter­ views . . . I advise you to think twice. It looks like KCC will not make any settlements with anyone who is not interviewed. ..." Renters and Homeowners Together In spite of the somewhat heavy counterattack, renters continued to organize. They scheduled a second and larger meeting for 13 February, one week after the first, and this time they invited homeowners to parti­ cipate. For that meeting another flyer was circulated stating: WE NEED ANSWERS Renters and Home Owners need to start planning . 'Our Futures' Come to the meeting Monday, February 13, 7:00 PM Catholic Church H a l l . 51 for This time more residents came, most of the rent­ ers from the week before and five or six homeowners for 75 the first time. Craig Petersen, a Salt Lake area attorney, who like Brian Barnard had been active in renter and housing issues, told those present that all of them were rent­ ers, whether they owned their homes and rented the land or just rented homes, they were all in the same boat. Peterson, reiterating Barnard's position, said the renters had rights. The residents may not have had legal rights, he said, but they had the right to expect Kennecott to live up to its responsibility. He advised residents they should not suffer a financial loss be­ cause of what the company did and they had a moral right to insist they weren't left at a financial disadvantage. Peterson talked about the federal guidelines used when publicly funded developments forced tenants to relocate. He explained how the guidelines had been used many times to settle disputes between developers and tenants. 52 The impression Barnard and Peterson left the res­ idents with was that they could reasonably expect Kenne­ cott to provide the "replacement" costs of their homes. Two professionals, attorneys with experience in renter disputes, were verifying for the residents, renter and homeowner, the notion that at least morally Kennecott owed them something and as a community they could ex­ press their demands to the company. At the 13 February meeting a fact sheet prepared 76 by the Utah Senior Coalition was circulated suggesting dollar amounts the residents might expect to receive. Using the federal relocation formula as a guide the figures suggested were • $500 for moving expenses • $5000 for each renter or $500 for each year of residence in Lark, whichever was greater • $50,000 for each homeowner or $500 for each year m Lark, whichever was greater. 53 The $5000 figure for renters was particularly meaningful because it was the same figure renters repre­ sented by Barnard had received. At the 13 February meeting the resident opposi­ tion took on more definition. They had come together twice without any sanction from the elected committee or Kennecott. Questions were being asked, stories told about successful resident struggles, ongoing advisory help was sought, legal representation discussed, and some dollar amounts for settlement were presented. Bernie and Elaine Trujillo played a major role in getting the first resident meetings together. They arranged for the meeting site with the Catholic pastor, Father McNicholas, made their home and telephone avail­ able to Tuttle, and worked with the South County commu­ nity outreach worker, Betty Ortiz, in getting flyers written up, copied and distributed. 77 It was about this time in the Lark story when Ortiz, editor of the Lark Newsletter, joined the renter/ homeowner group as a full supporter. Ortiz relates she "sidestepped" her more unsupportive South County co­ workers and "sort of overruled" them as- she "took more of an active role." And Tuttle, she says, "was working with those who wanted to take a position. Once more of us got together it was easier."54 The Ortiz move to support the growing renter/ homeowner coalition was a key change in the Lark orga­ nizing effort. Ortiz was the editor of the Lark News­ letter , the only regular source of information available in town, which was ". . . being read like the gospel." 55 As Ortiz began to quietly assert herself, the nature and content of the newsletter shifted noticeably. Where the 3 February issue (No. 2) carried material dis­ claiming Tuttle, other outsiders, and cautioned dissi­ dent renters, the 17 February (No. 4) issue was markedly supportive of the KCC opposition. In the 17 February Newsletter one letter said in part, "We are all human beings, we all deserved some­ thing from KCC. When KCC took over Lark they also took the responsibilities of the people of Lark. Morally they all owe us help to relocate . . . A second letter from Bernie and Elaine Trujillo challenged Tiva Gallegos in her role as a committee mem- 78 ber. Their letter said that when called on the phone she refused to tell the renters when the elected commit­ tee was meeting with the company. their questions and hung up. She refused to answer This was not the best way to meet the needs of the community, the Trujillo letter said. A cartoon in the same newsletter showed a renter and homeowner sitting in a large pot of water hanging over a cooking fire. The homeowner is saying to the renter, "We're in this [soup] together, ain't we?" 57 The Power Shifts In a few weeks from late January to mid-February the informal renter and homeowner coalition had come to­ gether. It was still a small minority of perhaps thirty of the Lark households. They had no formal power with the committee, no identity in the public eye, and no recognizable persuasion with Kennecott. And although the company and its supporters knew the opposition existed and felt its presence within the community, the balance of power still favored the com­ pany. Then the unexpected happened. Dick Rubright resigned. In the 17 February Lark Newsletter he wrote: Dear Friends, I have resigned from the Lark Committee. Due to the pressures upon me and my family, I feel I cannot represent the renters as I would like to . . . ^8 79 Rich Tuttle appeared at the Senior Coalition office in downtown Salt Lake City the same day and with a wide smile on his face said, "The door has been opened, the balance is shifted." Indeed it had. Another town meeting was called for Tuesday, 22 February, to elect a representative to fill the vacancy left by Rubright. The renter/homeowner coalition took immediate ad­ vantage of the situation. On Sunday, 19 February, they issued a news release charging Kennecott with being "evasive" about the future of Lark. An article in the Salt Lake Tribune quoted Ruth Truijillo as accusing Kennecott of making only a ". . . token effort to assess the needs of the residents. ..." She said Kennecott was inconsistent in the types of questions it was asking residents and she said a commu­ nity meeting would be held the next Tuesday night to discuss the problems. 59 Following Tuttle's advice that Sunday was usually a slow news day, this minor news release was circulated by the opposition on Sunday afternoon and it was pub­ lished. Besides the small article in the Salt Lake Tribune, the local Salt Lake electronic media picked up the story and used it on the Sunday evening and Monday morning television and radio news reports. Like the 80 newspaper article, these reports were short but they served the need of the Lark organizing effort to bring the Lark situation back into public view. Lark was back in the news again, and the new op­ position through a news release quoting one of its mem­ bers, Ruth Trujillo, had registered some legitimacy. No matter how small coverage of the story was, she had been quoted, the "ad hoc" group had some iden­ tity with the townspeople, Kennecott, the media and general public, and perhaps most significantly within themselves.^ After the news release was aired the group made two more moves. First they promoted the Tuesday meeting as a major media event. They called the Salt Lake news media as they had before, saying great happenings were in store. They said Lark had reached a turning point and the company and residents were preparing for a show­ down. In fact, besides filling Rubright's vacancy, nothing much was expected to happen at the Tuesday meeting. Next, with the media contacts made and the event pumped up, the renters and homeowners i n ■the coalition worked to get their supporters out to the meeting in order to elect Bernie Trujillo to fill the vacancy. Rubright's resignation could not have been more timely for the renters. They were just coming together, 81 becoming more vocal and starting to focus their demands. A vacancy on the town committee gave them an im­ mediate goal to reach for. Bernie Trujillo was the logical person to sup­ port for the position. For the last month he and Elaine, his wife, had been pushing for a chance to change things and now it came. Bernie recalls, " . . . somehow it came . . . there was a vacancy and someone should be voted. "So we got together one night, I can't remember how many, fourteen, or twenty-four or so, and we got together and they elected me to run. "And we went before that town meeting and they all stood up, voted for me." 61 With a deliberate assist from the renter/home­ owner group, the town meeting on Tuesday, 21 February, was a full-blown media event portraying the growing polarization in Lark. In the meeting, . . . the split between homeowners and renters in Lark was accentuated. The meeting was held in the brightly lit but battered "Lions" hall, where Lark citizens had to step on television camera cords, around lights and over newsmen to get inside. The Lark Newsletter said, . . . Approximately seventy-five residents attended . . . plus TV crews, newspaper people and represen­ tatives from the South County Community Action Pro- 82 gram, the Senior Citizens Coalition and Western Action. All in all it was a full house. After five persons were nominated, Bernie was elected by his supporters and the opposition had its first victory. Although elected, Bernie had difficulty getting time to express himself in the meeting. He recalls he ". . . was trying to voice my opinion about the people who were on that committee and they wouldn't let me talk. "They cut the committee off short, they wouldn't let me voice my opinion . . . "Mike [Martinez] just cut me off . . . " 64 Martinez was running the meeting on behalf of the elected town committee. Without Rubright, who had been the committee president, the remaining members turned to Martinez to run things for them. (Of the committee members, Miller, Powers, Sanchez and Gallegos still supported Kennecott. The other member, Bob Bardsley, continued to support a uni­ fied town committee but wanted to place demands on the company. At this point he was not fully supportive of the opposition group.) Assuming control of the meeting, Martinez told the residents they had three basic choices: 1. Sell their homes with a Kennecott appraisal or one of their own 83 2. Move their homes to Copperton with the com­ pany paying the bill 3. Buy new homes with low income federal pro­ gram assistance. Martinez advised that Lark residents relocate where they want and said some rental units would be available in Copperton. 65 Bernie Trujillo,, as the newly elected town com­ mittee member, said to Martinez he would like to look into the legal rights of renters, many of who couldn't afford to move to the Salt Lake Valley. This is when Martinez cut him off, reiterating the position he had taken a month earlier that renters had no legal rights and that individuals should make their own decisions, the committee could only work on group solutions. Despite Martinez's efforts to control the meeting and quell the renter opposition, the television coverage that evening and in the newspaper the next day featured accounts of Bernie or Elaine Trujillo telling the oppo­ sition story. The news accounts told how the dissident residents insisted that: 1. Kennecott had not given enough notice; resi­ dents thought they could stay until 1992 2. Kennecott bought Lark; they bought the re­ sponsibility, including a moral obligation to help 3. Kennecott's pushing of federal housing aid was passing responsibility on to the taxpayer 84 4. Moving to a Kennecott project in Copperton merely repeated the Lark situation. Besides, Kennecott was getting out of the company town business^ The responses given the media by the Trujillos reflected a well-developed position. In their meetings with other residents and the formation of the renterbased group, they had gathered the information and con­ fidence necessary to effectively speak for themselves before the public, be it in town meetings or with the general news media. Their newfound ability and confi­ dence would help them on several occasions in the coming three months. Hard Feelings Develop Following the 22 February town meeting in Lark, later that evening an acrimonious confrontation took place between Mike Martinez and Rich Tuttle and Tim Funk. Dan Lopp, Tuttle's supervisor at Western Action, and a one-time associate of Martinez, arranged a summit meeting at a local cafe to explore any common ground be­ tween the opposing factions. Upon meeting, Tuttle and Funk asked Martinez why he was afraid of letting the residents, especially the renters, speak and ask questions at the meeting. Martinez responded by saying Tuttle and Funk had no business in Lark and he for one wasn't a . . 85 bleeding heart liberal . . . " who supported organizing i 4. 67 Lark renters. Funk said that was unbelievable coming from Martinez, who as a Chicano had taken advantage of sev­ eral minority opportunity programs on his way to getting a law degree. Martinez was doing more harm than good in Lark, Funk said, and it would be better if he stayed away. Why? Martinez asked. "Because the people don't trust you," Funk said, a statement that turned Martinez's face red. Tuttle mentioned to Martinez that he was checking with the State Attorney General's office to see if Martinez, a staff attorney there, was involved in a con­ flict of interest in his role as committee advisor. Tuttle also mentioned he hoped Martinez wasn't a private attorney for any Lark residents because that would certainly be in conflict with his role as commit­ tee advisor. He was checking on that too, Tuttle said. For whatever reasons, following the confrontation with Tuttle and Funk, Martinez did not visibly represent the town committee again until the last meeting with Kennecott on May 8, when the Lark issue culminated. He effectively removed himself from the scene, an absence that helped the opposition all the more. Hard feelings came with the job in Lark and Rich 86 Tuttle was the object of several physical threats both direct and indirect. Trying to represent all resident viewpoints, Betty Ortiz printed all the letters she received in the Lark Newsletter including one that said: . . . a group of troublemakers from out of state are trying to divide the people . . . Mr. Tuttle and followers are not recognized by KCC. Through veiled threats some of the members of our committee want to resign, my family and I are not afraid of any communist inspired group . . . If Mr. Tuttle and/or his group come to my house they will rec. the same reception if not stronger than the one they rec. at Mr. [John Doe's] house . 68 The danger did not abate. As late as April some­ one was circulating Ku Klux Klan flyers in Lark warning residents of "communist" intruders. Tuttle found one such flyer under his car's windshield wiper. The County Sheriff's office was notified and a couple of suspected residents were talked to by Sher­ iff's deputies. Searching for Unity Following Bernie Trujillo's election, an effort was made to consolidate the opposition position and take further steps to enhance the opportunity the new success represented. On 24 February, a special strategy meeting was held at Bernie and Elaine Trujillo's house. present included the Trujillos, Those Ruth Trujillo, Hilda 87 Grabner, and four or five other residents. They were matched almost one-for-one by the outside interests there. Tuttle and Lopp from Western Action; Funk from the Senior Coalition; Myrna Guber and Betty Ortiz, South . . 69 County, were there assuming a supportive role. Ted Buzis, a leading figure in several Salt Lake community organizing happenings, and Father Sullivan, the former Lark pastor, were invited to reflect with the residents. Father Sullivan and Buzis both told stories of their experiences in situations like Lark. Whether a corporation, a building developer, or the government, whoever for whatever purpose, if they want to evict residents they will try to divide and con­ quer the opposition, both Buzis and Sullivan told the gathering. If they can divide you, you will get less; if you stay together and stick together you will get more, Buzis told them. Buzis, experienced in landlord-renter wars in Salt Lake’s Central City, advised, Remember one thing, the only thing that counts is bucks. How many bucks is coming to you. You know, they call you communist, anything they want, but the only thing that counts is those bucks going to the people; that's why they're trying to split you up.70 Father Sullivan said Kennecott managed to split the community in Bingham. Although the residents tried to unify, Kennecott bought out a major business and a large landowner and this fractured the basis for any unified negotiating stand by the townspeople. After that, he said, . . . there was nothing we could do. Then the company offered people prices all over town. They called everybody, they gave them all a price; the prices made no rhyme nor reason. It looked as if they had taken the parcels of property, put the parcels in a hat, put the prices in another hat, drew them out and matched 'em. There was no rhyme nor reason to it at all. And the reason I know this was so is because I had the whole thing. I had all the offered prices, the description of the property, the homeowners— everything— the whole list. We had two appraisers come in to appraise the Catholic Church property and both appraisers told me they couldn't understand how in the world they [Kennecott] appraised that property. Because there'd be three homes for instance, exactly alike, one would be offered $3500, the next door neighbor was offered $10,000, and the other neighbor was offered $15,000. Well, the guy who got the $15,000 sold. And that's why they didn't stick together, they didn't hang together. You've got that old human greed, [it] comes in there and they didn't stick together. So everyone finally took what was offered and that was it. They won, the company won. Asked about the renters in Bingham, Father Sulli­ van deferred to John Trujillo, Ruth's father. you lived in Bingham as a renter. "John, Tell us what hap­ pened," Sullivan said. Trujillo answered simply, "Nobody said nothing, we just had to move and we moved." 72 From the discussion came strong agreement that 89 the best thing to do was to continue trying to unify the community. Bob Bardsley was seen as the main hope for pulling the town committee together. Rich Tuttle said, "We know Bob Bardsley is sup­ porting us at least to a degree. He has never said any­ thing bad about us and he feels like there are some good things going on."73 Hilda Grabner shared that opinion. I think if you can get Bob Bardsley on your side, totally, I think he's been wavering. I just think he has been afraid to talk or do anything up to this point. But if he would just open up one time it would clear the air with everybody . . . ^ they will begin to see everything is on the level. Tuttle added that while work with the renters should continue and not be lost, "I think you have to keep making a constant effort all the time to try and reunite that committee." Stressing the need for town unity, the group agreed to try and meet with the elected committee and set $5000 as the tentative standard needed for renter relocation. They also decided to appeal for unity through the Lark Newsletter and by going door-to-door talking with families about the Lark situation. It was also agreed that whatever they did the residents questioning Kennecott had to continue telling their story to the other residents and to the public. They wanted to gain as much support for their cause as 90 they could. Kennecott soon gave them another chance to do just that. Water, Rust, and Demolition Without notice on Monday morning, 2 7 February, a Kennecott bulldozer began mowing down empty rental units in a part of Lark called the "Heights." Located up the hill on which Lark was built, the Heights was a series of multiple-unit barracks-type buildings constructed during World War II to house gov­ ernment workers and troops. Perhaps half of the units in the Heights were still occupied or habitable when Kennecott purchased the town. Living there were native Americans, Chicanos, and one or two widowers, most of them low income, all of them renters, numbering a dozen households or so. When the Kennecott bulldozer appeared the Heights residents were terrified. An empty structure sitting in between several occupied units was targeted for demoli­ tion. Electrical lines to the building were discon­ nected, interrupting service to the other units, and then the bulldozer started pounding at roof and walls trying to crash it down. The roar of the large machine and the crashing of its blade on the building caused a lot of noise and dust and created fear in the resi­ dents . 91 Word of the demolition reached Bernie Trujillo almost immediately. Three of the Heights residents called him, one right after the other. Bernie in turn contacted Tuttle and Funk, who were at the Senior Citi­ zen Coalition office in Salt Lake City. Trujillo said he was going up to talk to the Heights tenants and see what was happening firsthand. He asked Tuttle and Funk to contact the news media and tell them what was going on. They said they would and would come up to Lark as soon as they could. Within fifteen minutes Trujillo called again and said the Kennecott bulldozer had burst a water line in the Lark system and the town's water supply might be jeopardized. With Kennecott in such a fix, Funk suggested that Truijillo hold a news conference in the Heights an hour later. The news media were contacted a second time and told of the urgent and "perilous" circumstances in Lark because the town's water system was in danger of con­ tamination. Before heading for Lark, Funk contacted the Salt Lake County Health Department to make certain the proper authorities were informed. It was an emergency, they were told, the whole town was in danger. By early afternoon news reporters and public health people were scurrying around Lark checking things 92 out. Bernie Truijillo was there talking with the resi­ dents, trying to reassure them and making himself avail­ able for at least a half dozen interviews with news­ paper, radio and television reporters who came to cover the story. Kennecott continued to accommodate the image of the ruthless landlord by failing to stop the flow of the broken line until well into the afternoon, after the news media had departed. There was no danger, the company kept assuring everyone including the residents in the Heights. It was only a minor water pipe and its condition wouldn't af­ fect the rest of the town. Bernie told the news report­ ers he wasn't so sure, that he often had rust in his water and at best the Lark water system was tempera­ mental . The incident was a major local news story that night. Bernie was seen on two of Salt Lake's three major television stations carrying his two-year-old son in his arms, meeting with residents and wondering out loud what Kennecott was trying to do. No one was notified, he said, residents were frightened, the safety of little kids and the elderly residents was threatened, and the entire town's water supply imperiled, just what was the company doing? 76 Again the renter/homeowner oppositon took advan- 93 tage of any opportunity to tell their story. Assuming a leadership role, Bernie Trujillo responded to resi­ dents' requests for help. He notified his supporters, got them to assist and then proceeded to work with the people in the Heights talking to them and giving them reassurance. When the news media arrived he spoke to them clearly and simply about what was happening and the fear it was causing. The opposition had once more put its story before the public, again casting Kennecott Copper in the role of the bad guy. Not that the news coverage gained by Trujillo and the opposition went unchallenged. In a subsequent issue of the Lark Newsletter one resident wrote asking: How can people stand up and outright lie to the news media? . . . the tearing down of the unused part of the Heights is one of the best things that could happen in Lark. . . . Why is Mr. Tuttle doing this to the people of Lark? Making us look like idiots to people else­ where. He is manipulating his followers more or less like he's a ventriloquist manipulating his dummies.77 The writer said they would not sign their name because they feared harassment. About this time General Manager Bob Pratt said in an interview that the company had been mistaken in its handling of the Lark affair at least in the beginning. He said, 94 We should have waited until we had all the facts. We shouldn't have tried to reassure the people until we knew how much we could offer each family. That's the kind of thing we are working on now. Our people will talk with each family. Come back in a year and see if we haven't done right by the people of L a r k . 78 By the end of February some six weeks after Rich Tuttle arrived in Lark, the renter-based opposition to Kennecott had organized itself into a power position. In a short time the opposition had found a place to gather, in the Catholic Church hall, held their own series of meetings, started defining their needs, placed pressure on Rubright forcing him to resign, managed the election of Bernie Truijillo, and increased their numbers. They grew from two or three to about twenty ren­ ter and five homeowner households. They conducted two successful media events involving Bernie's election and the Heights demolition. Community support from outside of Lark had been solidified, the full-time organizer Tuttle was there, and the Lark Newsletter had taken up their cause. As legal landowner, Kennecott was in a commanding position in the beginning, but it lost hold of the situ­ ation. As the opposition organized, the company failed to communicate directly. In January and February their only voice was Gene Petersen in the Lark office and he was talking to certain residents and to some concerned 95 community figures like the AFL-CIO's Ed Mayne, but not enough was being done to counteract the resurrection of the company's ogre image as promoted by the renter/home­ owner coalition through the media. Petersen admits the company wanted to quiet things down, get people through the interviews and have the homes appraised. long. 79 . But things were quiet for too The interviews and appraisals took too much time and the company had no set answers to give to the resi­ dents or the general public. Kennecott created its own information vacuum, a vacuum the growing opposition filled in the coming months. The Opposition Expands As March drew near the situation in Lark was un­ certain. Kennecott had finished its interviews with the residents but the company remained noncommittal on any firm propositions. No will existed among residents to try and pre­ serve the town; instead, their concern centered on settling with the company and getting enough to leave town on. Not that some of the residents lacked staying power. Hilda Grabner, recalling the pride Lark resi­ dents had in their town, talked with one reporter about how her independence had helped her through her widow­ hood . 96 When my husband knew he was dying, he cut me a year's supply of kindling wood for the stove. He said he hated to think of me out there chopping wood. I can't tell you how much kindling I've chopped since. And that's another thing about this moving busi­ ness. I've got enough kindling to last me for next year, tool^O And on staying the battle with Kennecott: We're going to fight them, no doubt . . .We're not babes in the wood. We know a bad deal when we hear it. We may be a little rusty about fighting, and most of us may be old, but we've not disinte­ grated. 81 Mrs. Grabner was part of those resisting the town closing from the beginning and for a while she was the only homeowner. Then gradually other homeowners began to join in. On 2 3 February the South County CAP sponsored a Saturday get together at the Lion's rec hall to try and generate some unity in the community. The meeting in­ cluded an innocuous statement telephoned by Utah Con­ gressman Dan Marriott, words from an aide to Utah Sena­ tor Orrin Hatch, a speech from a Congressional candidate and some words from Ed Mayne of the AFL-CIO. And though not much was accomplished the meeting brought Rich Tuttle into direct person-to-person contact with Emma Jean Howland. Mrs. Howland was a married working mother, who had lived with her husband Lawrence and their six chil­ dren in Lark for seven years. The Howlands were home- 97 owners and although the place they lived in was humble, they had no way of replacing it. Mrs. Howland followed the Lark organizing effort from its inception but because of her work schedule and her doubts about making any difference in the conflict, she held back. Encouraged by her meeting and conversa­ tion with Tuttle and inspired by her neighbors Hilda Grabner and Bernie and Elaine Trujillo, she started to come forth. among others, As her participation in­ creased her standing as a homeowner broadened the antiKennecott coalition and eventually she would become chairperson of the Lark elected town committee. 82 The Gap Broadens In the early part of March the gap between those supporting Kennecott and those organizing against it seemed to broaden. The residents working with Tuttle had vowed their support for a unified effort with the elected committee if possible. Their effort was typi­ fied to some extent through the Lark Newsletter and Betty Ortiz who continued editorializing for a united stand. One Ortiz-written plea said: A great deal of energy and good ideas are being wasted in fighting each other— let's get it together and fight for each other, it will take a united group effort to face K C C . 83 Residents writing to the Newsletter seemed to agree to some extent. One poet said in part: 98 From all signs KCC has been doing their best, Now we need understanding from the rest, If we all pull together and take a united stand, There won't be a problem of things getting out of hand.84 And another letter in a later issue of the News­ letter calling for unity stated: . . . If we don't work together here we might as well "hang it up." KCC does not care if we fight with each other, because it is hurting no one but the people here in Lark . . . the sooner we all move along the better KCC will like it.^5 In spite of the pleas to stick together, more of a cleavage developed between those in the resistance and the Kennecott supporters. This was demonstrated dramat­ ically in the 14 March meeting called by the elected town committee to update residents on any new happenings and to discuss questions of further demolition in the Heights. With Rubright's resignation no new committee chairman had been selected, so Richard Powers was asked to chair the meeting held in the Lions Club hall. In attendance were Powers, the other committee representa­ tives, the usual community group representatives and a small number of residents. Arriving late were Rich Tuttle and Tim Funk, who came up from Salt Lake City for the meeting. Upon en­ tering Tuttle and Funk were challenged by the angry, red-faced and shaking Powers. "Leave," he demanded. "Get out of here, or I'll 99 throw you out. We don't need any of Tuttle or his troublemakers. This meeting is closed." Sitting down at the side of the room, Tuttle and Funk were startled. Powers was a big, burly man and presented a formidable foe if he became physically violent. Tuttle looked at Funk and asked in a low tone, "Are we going to let this guy throw us out?" Funk, without conviction, responded, "I don't ... ii36 think so. After raging on for several minutes Powers was finally interrupted by his fellow committee members who admonished him about his hostility and told him whatever differences existed the town meetings were open and any­ one who wanted to could attend and participate. Tuttle and Funk stayed and the meeting proceeded. The rest of the evening Powers was rather subdued, and from that night on Powers' participation in committee activities would fall off to almost nothing; he did not resign until the Lark issue was resolved, but he removed himself from any effective role. One motion was passed during the meeting direct­ ing the committee to advise Kennecott that homeowners were seeking $45,000 for replacement of their homes. This was based on a figure given earlier in meetings with attorneys Barnard and Peterson, and its discussion 100 and passage marked another small step forward in the or­ ganizing effort. In Tuttle's reckoning, with Powers effectively removing himself from committee participation and a mo­ tion calling for $45,000 homeowner compensation moved and adopted, the door was opened further for the opposi­ tion to push its demands on Kennecott; the organizing 87 effort was making headway. Another meeting, primarily for renters, was held on 17 March in the Catholic Church hall. Renter repre­ sentative Pat Sanchez led the discussion of what renters wanted the elected committee to negotiate for them with Kennecott. Suggestions included: $5,000 plus $500 moving expenses for each household, and that Kennecott follow federal relocation guidelines, give moving ex­ penses only, or give free rent until August 1978. None of these were formally adopted. Complaints about representation were heard. Since the owners had their official representative in attorney Mike Martinez it was said the renters thought they should have their own official representative too. Rich Tuttle was nominated and elected 17-5. This was too much for Sanchez and Tiva Gallegos (filling in for her husband Charles who was the elected committee member), who left in protest. 88 So within a five-day period action had been taken 101 establishing an amount for homeowners and making Tuttle an official renter advisor, possible settlement amounts for the renters had been presented and three elected committee members supportive of Kennecott had withdrawn from full participation in the negotiating process. The opposition had not conceived such a course of events but the pressure of their organizing activities were instru­ mental in making them happen. This set the stage for the meeting the next week between Kennecott and the elected town committee. The town committee meeting with Kennecott was held on 22 March. Those present included Leonard Miller and Bob Bardsley from the elected committee and Gene Petersen and his assistant in Lark, Matt Bowen. Bardsley reported the outcome of the Kennecott meeting at yet another general town meeting in the Lark Lions Club hall on 30 March. Leonard Miller Resigns At the start of the 30 March meeting Leonard Miller's resignation from the elected town committee was announced. A statement given by Miller to the Lark Newsletter said, Knowing I cannot and will not work with a cer­ tain party in town whom I feel is doing the town more harm than good I now resign as a Committee member. He said "recent developments" in Lark were 102 jeopardizing the chances of the senior citizens and the handicapped of receiving a fair settlement. It's hard to promise anyone a rose garden if they don't own the soil. More power to those who can!8 9 Miller's resignation meant more power to those in the opposition. Just as Rubright had with his resigna­ tion and Powers, Sanchez and Gallegos would by not par­ ticipating in the committee meetings, he relinquished power to those who stayed active, namely the other elec­ ted members, Bob Bardsley, Bernie Trujillo and eventu­ ally Emma Jean Howland. It was decided to wait until the next town meeting to elect a replacement for Miller. A New Strategy Forms 90 After announcement of Miller's resignation Bob Bardsley told those present in the 30 March meeting how he had presented Petersen with the figures of $45,000 for homeowners and $5,000 for renters and Petersen's response was in part, " . . . the people over there must be smoking some funny stuff." Petersen told Bardsley and the committee he had sent his recommendations in to the Salt Lake office and he didn't know how soon a response would come. Petersen indicated it would have to be approved by the Kennecott head office in New York, that they wouldn't be meeting until 2 May [date of the annual stockholders meeting]. 103 Petersen thought an answer would come the early part of May or a bit later in the month. Bardsley related how he continued his pitch on the settlement dollar figure and finally Petersen broke in and " . . . said it was a ridiculous proposal, and if we kept insisting someone in Kennecott might get mad." According to Bardsley, Petersen also said, " . . . if they [the New York office] buy his recommendation, there would be no use running to the press because you wouldn't be able to get public sympathy because the recommendation would be favorable. "He says, 'We know you know how to run to the press. You've showed us that.' They're scared of the press, there's no question about it in my mind that's our best weapon," Bardsley said. Peterson continued to warn against any further opposition by telling Bardsley the protesters didn't have any bargaining power. To which Bardsley opined to the residents hearing his report, "But we do have some bargaining power because if we didn't have any bargain­ ing power the first meeting would have been it, there would have been no other meeting. The press did help us, we know the press did help us get where we are today." For the first time, Bardsley reported, Petersen implied there would be some kind of compensation for 104 renters if his proposal was accepted. In addition, Petersen reiterated a hope he had for resettling some of the town's older people, perhaps in a new senior housing complex on Kennecott property in nearby Copperton, another mining town. Water supply and demolition were also discussed in the meeting. Petersen said the water supply was guaranteed but that demolitions would continue. Bardsley's report was confirmed in an interview with Gene Petersen, who said as Kennecott's man in charge in Lark, by 15 March he had sent " . . . recommendations to my principals." written They were: • Buy the homes and pay more than fair market value. I didn't say how much more but Bingham provided a precedent. • Pay a substantial amount of money if residents moved by a certain date. • Pay moving expenses. People in Lark were very poor and couldn't move without such help. • For the traditional residents, the ones who had been there a long time, buy their homes and pay moving expenses, or take as many of the better homes and move them to Copperton, or build new homes.91 Petersen said he wasn't sure how much his recom­ mendations would cost the company. He said Salt Lake County was reevaluating property as part of a statewide update of property tax evaluations in mid-April. But Petersen was worried about taking more time and he asked the county if they could do Lark earlier. He said, "I 105 knew the delay was going to cause some problems and would give your people more time to agitate things." Lark was reevaluated and the list of current property values was made available to Petersen and Ken­ necott by early April. It is worth noting of the Petersen interview that in it he mentioned nothing about compensation for rent­ ers or what rights they had, but he did say, "I knew in February what we had to do: pay for those homes and set up incentives to get them to move. I knew the pendulum has swung in sixty years from property rights to human 92 rights. The Next Steps to Take Bardsley's report completed, discussion in the 30 March meeting centered on what next steps to take. There was general agreement that with the Kennecott offer four to six weeks away the opposition should try to force the company hand sooner. Bernie Truijillo, saying he spoke for the rent­ ers, stated, . . . we [renters and homeowners] are all basically renters. The renters are looking for a way out too. The voice of the renters says we'll go the minute, as soon as they give us some money to leave just like you homeowners. We're 100 percent for pushing Kennecott, to get it in the media and start stirring this up to see if we can get some reaction from Kennecott.93 Gaining further media attention became the main 106 consensus of the residents present. A public relations committee made up of Emma Jean Howland, Elaine Trujillo and Ruth Trujillo was nominated and accepted by a vote of 24-0. One possibility for publicity suggested by Tim Funk was that the townspeople send a delegation to New York to meet with the Kennecott Board of Directors at the annual meeting on 2 May. As luck would have it, from mid-March up to the stockholders meeting Kennecott was in a life-and-death struggle with Curtiss-Wright Corporation for control of the company, a situation that Funk and others thought provided a grand opportunity for more publicity. Kennecott and Curtiss-Wright Slug it Out On 13 March Curtiss-Wright Corporation, a New Jersey-based aerospace firm, disclosed to the Securities and Exchange Commission that it had acquired 9.9 percent of the shares of Kennecott and might seek proxies to put its own nominees on the KCC board at the annual meeting in New York City on 2 May. Its purchase made it the single largest shareholder of Kennecott stock. Said one account of the affair: At the same time it [Curtiss-Wright] indicated its intent might be to sell some of the assets of KCC to the advantage of stockholders. It said it would particularly attempt to sell the Carborundum Company acquired by KCC in a $5 70 million cash 107 transaction last year and turn the proceeds over to KCC shareholders.94 In 1977 Kennecott was forced by the Federal Trade Commission to sell Peabody Coal Company for $2 billion. With a tremendous amount of cash revenue on its hands, Kennecott purchased Carborundum to improve its invest­ ment situation. T. Roland Berner, Chairman of Curtiss-Wright, saw Kennecott as a plum to be picked. As a world copper giant Kennecott was sitting on a copper reserve poten­ tially worth $25 billion and it was a company moving slowly under conservative management. The world copper market was depressed and Kennecott’s stock (in Berner's eyes anyway) was undervalued, making its purchase a bar­ gain be it in a takeover effort or otherwise. Add to this the cash reserve from the Peabody sale and Berner's ambitious bid for control was launched. 95 Kennecott, five times larger than Curtiss-Wright, took the chances of takeover seriously. They fought the Curtiss-Wright purchase and solicitation of proxies in court right up to the 2 May stockholders meeting and beyond. As the battle raged in the Utah, Nevada courts and in federal court in New York, Kennecott and CurtissWright attacked each other viciously in an advertising campaign conducted in the New York Times and the Wall 108 Street Journal. Charges and countercharges were made about the ability and the motives of each company. Kennecott hired a large New York law firm to help fight the proxy battle. It started a bitter campaign to its shareholders questioning Berner's record as a lawyer and manager and attacking the Curtiss-Wright takeover posi­ tion. And it hired a big public relations firm, Hill & Knowlton, to help plead its case to the shareholders and the public. All of this controversy narrowed down to which company would have a majority of the Kennecott shares to be voted on at the 2 May annual meeting, a showdown that put the whole affair squarely in the public eye. What effect the Kennecott/Curtiss-Wright affair was having on Lark was not yet clearly evident. There was strong agreement among the renter/homeowner coali­ tion that it didn't really matter who was in charge after 2 May. Either one, they said, would have a moral responsibility to settle equitably with the residents. Bob Bardsley sized up the impact of CurtissWright on the Lark residents as, . . . I don't really see at this point, myself, how it could affect us too much. Other than they [Kennecott] may divert more time saving their skins than saving Lark skins.97 109 The Opposition Works Its Strategy With the 30 March town meeting the opposition was squarely in the driver's seat. Gene Petersen had sent his settlement proposal to the upper management, which was deeply involved with the larger Curtiss-Wright ques­ tion. Rubright and Miller, Kennecott stalwarts on the elected committee, had resigned. Powers, Sanchez and Gallegos, also favorable to the company, were reluctant to participate. Definitive dollar amounts for home­ owners and renters had been adopted. Further, the re­ sistance had successfully publicized their plight, they had set up a publicity committee and Kennecott was still not providing any set answers. Gene Petersen, summing up the organizing effort, saw it this way: You drove the old people away from the meetings with trauma, took over one half of the committee, set conditions that were impossibly high for anyone to meet. I read the Alinsky books and I know some­ thing about agitation and m a n i p u l a t i o n . 9 8 And from his own days as an organizer, Petersen said, "I know how to stir a turd and make it stink." Bardsley and Trujillo matters. took charge of committee They called a meeting for 14 April, at which time someone would be elected to replace Miller. In the meantime other residents including Hilda Grabner, Elaine Trujillo, Ruth Trujillo and Emma Jean Howland began planning the media strategy favored in the 110 30 March meeting. They arranged a meeting of the Lark public relations committee for 6 April at the Utah AFLCIO offices. Present at the meeting were the Trujillos, Bardsley, Howland, Ortiz, Funk, Tuttle, and AFL-CIO director Ed Mayne and his publicity director Tim Rice. Almost immediately the group arrived at agreement that it should be recommended to Lark residents that a dele­ gation representing Lark be sent to the annual Kennecott shareholders meeting. A Lark delegation fund would be set up and contributions would be sought from the com­ munity with the AFL-CIO, South County CAP, the Senior Coalition and Western Action pledging to raise the money for one person each. Those at the meeting were asked to go back to Lark and start talking the idea up. There was some discussion of the Curtiss-Wright situation. Whether or not the dispute was resolved before the shareholders meeting, it was thought prepara­ tions for the delegation's trip to New York City should be made. In addition, comment was made that there had been little or no local press coverage of the Lark predica­ ment for four to five weeks and that public awareness of the situation needed a boost, especially to prompt sup­ port for the New York venture. The public relations committee volunteered to try and generate interest in Ill the upcoming community meeting. Prior to the 13 April meeting the Lark Newsletter gave notice that anyone receiving hate mail should con­ tact the Salt Lake office of the F.B.I. Ku Klux Klan flyers were circulating again in the town and for the second time Rich Tuttle had one put on the windshield . 99 of his car. Tensions were running high. On the day before the meeting Tuttle and Funk were driving along the Interstate on their way to Lark. They were intensely involved in talk about what to do next when from the rear of the car came an explosive bang! There was a long, silent pause and Tuttle, who was driving, looked over at Funk and said, "My God, I thought they'd hit us." The bang was from a backfiring truck. At the 13 April meeting in^the Lions Club there was more intensity. The Salt Lake news media, notified that new things were in the wind, came to the meeting. Bardsley and Truijillo started the session saying the first order of business was the election of a person to replace Leonard Miller. As nominations were asked for a big, chunky, red-faced man wearing a neck brace and a leather jacket began yelling at the committee members challenging their right to have a meeting and offering veiled threats of violence. At the start there were 112 other catcalls and hoots, but as the man in the neck brace continued yelling louder and more vociferously the audience quieted and turned towards him. Then the man, starting to draw verbal abuse from the rest of the resi­ dents, leveled a final volley of hot words and left, led away by his wife. Sandy Gilmour, a reporter for Salt Lake televi­ sion station KUTV-2, was alarmed enough that he shut off his camera lights and edged his way out the back door of the Lions Club. Outside he said the man yelling was crazy and he didn't want the presence of the camera to provoke him unnecessarily. Finally Emma Jean Howland was elected to the com­ mittee and made its new chairwoman, the residents pres­ ent voted to send a delegation to the New York stock­ holders meeting and a motion was passed asking that no more unsigned letters be printed in the newsletter.100 Later that evening television coverage of the event was low-keyed, mentioning only that since Lark residents had not heard from Kennecott they had voted to send a group of representatives to New York to get some answers. The renter/homeowner coalition had met before the meeting and planned the election of Emma Jean Howland. They made a concerted effort to get enough supporters out to the meeting so she would win, which she did. 113 They also plotted more media strategy. Two days after the meeting, the public relations committee issued a news release asking Kennecott about its plans. Hilda Grabner, Elaine Trujillo, Bob Bardsley and Rich Tuttle said in the release the company had kept residents in the dark, they said they had " . . . re­ ceived no firm offers from KCC although they have waited four months for a settlement they feel may be inaae4. ,.101 quate. Five days later Emma Jean Howland released a pub­ lic statement soliciting community support for the New York delegation. She said that though Kennecott had a legal right to evict the residents, "We are fighting a moral issue," and she wanted answers about relocation. 102 About this same time Tuttle was contacting local Salt Lake media outlets about the\plans to send a dele­ gation to the meeting. The Curtiss-Wright matter was ever prominent in the news and the Lark delegation started to ride the coattails of the story. A short addition to a Kennecott/Curtiss-Wright story about the showdown said, The annual meeting also may be flavored by the appearance of six Lark, Utah residents. Their intent, according to Richard Tuttle, one of the six, will be to have the board of directors of Kennecott state what their proposed settlement is for the residents of Lark.l|J3 114 The story finished with another recounting of the Lark story from December on. The Delegation Forms, Advance Plans Are Made As it developed, the Lark delegation grew to in­ clude Emma Jean Howland as chairwoman of the Lark elected committee, Bernie and Elaine Trujillo, Ruth Trujillo, Bob Bardsley and Hilda Grabner, all residents, and Rich Tuttle, Betty Ortiz and Nancy Funk in various supporting roles. Although the residents present at the April town meeting approved the idea of sending a group to New York, delegation members were never officially chosen or sanctioned by the town residents. Instead the mem­ bers came from the core group which led the opposition to Kennecott. Their participation was determined by . . their involvement m . A . . . the issue, their willingness to make the trip and their capacity to raise money for expenses. Response to the delegation's pleas for financial help was broad. Individuals, community groups, organi­ zations and churches made partial or full commitments to sponsor delegates. Those who gave money included dif­ ferent union locals, local Catholic priests and parish­ ioners, Salt Lake CAP, the Senior Coalition, Crossroads Urban Center and Western Action. 115 In the midst of the fundraising effort Emma Jean Howland, a Catholic, had a visit with Joseph Federal, Bishop of the Utah Catholic diocese, to explain the residents' position and the involvement of Western Action, which was partially funded with money from the Catholic Church. During her conversation with the Bishop, Howland asked him if Kennecott had contacted him about the acti­ vity in Lark and the fundraising. The Bishop said yes, he had heard from the management but that the Lark ef­ fort and Mrs. Howland had the blessings of the local pastor, Fr. McNicholas, and he saw no reason for any intervention in the fundraising or otherwise. 104 As the fundraising progressed Tuttle and Funk began preparing a media strategy for the New York trip. They called upon Funk's wife, Nancy, a journalist with the Salt Lake Tribune and a frequent visitor to New York City, for help. The three laid out an advance plan for the delegation. Nancy was to go to New York City sever­ al days in advance of the delegation. She would contact as many local and national print and broadcast outlets as she could. Before she left, preliminary contacts would be made with these outlets to give them a preview of the delegation and its purpose and to identify Nancy as the primary contact person. An extensive list of recommended New York contacts was collected from a vari­ 116 ety of national social action, labor and church groups operating in New York. Other contacts were recommended by those in the delegation and their supporters. Tim and Nancy Funk helped the delegation put together a press kit including a statement of their purpose, delegation biographies, a chronology of events, and a collection of news clippings revealing the history of the confrontation with Kennecott. Why Go to New York? On April 26 the Lark Newsletter asked the ques­ tion, "Why go to New York?" The answer it gave read in part, . . . By sending a group of residents we will get national publicity and national support— our purpose xs to get answers publicly. Empty verbal promises and suggestions by Kenne­ cott do not count. Public statements and written commitments are going to make the difference because KCC will have to live up to what they sayl!! And they will be forced to make a statement which they do not want to do.-^^^ Before they left the coalition took one more shot at Kennecott in Salt Lake City. Aware of the public at­ tention their New York trip was generating, the group arranged one last meeting with the Utah management of Kennecott. Several times over the preceding months in­ dividual Lark residents and members of the coalition had tried to meet with someone else in the company besides Gene Petersen but to no avail. Yet with a strong chal­ 117 lenge being made through the media and the opposition viewpoint being represented through a newly composed elected committee, apparently the company felt compelled to respond. General Manager Bob Pratt agreed to meet with Emma Jean Howland in his office in downtown Salt Lake City on Saturday afternoon, 29 April. The delegation was scheduled to leave for New York City the evening of the next day. Upon arriving at the Kennecott offices a group of about thirty including Mrs. Howland, Bob Bards­ ley, the Trujillos, and about twenty-five residents and supporters filled the outer lobby. Pratt refused to admit Mrs. Howland into his office. He said he would not meet with her and the group in the lobby, charging her with a "breach of faith" for inviting outside advisors and the press to join her in her meeting with him. Every major Salt Lake media outlet was present observing Howland as she talked over the telephone in the lobby to Pratt imprisoned in his office somewhere in the building. Finally the group left the building and afterward Mrs. Howland told the media gathered, "We can only hope and pray they will be more sympathetic in New York and realize real human rights have been violated." X06 118 The Advance Work While residents were meeting with Pratt and the delegation was preparing for its trip to New York, Nancy Funk was already there laying the groundwork for their arrival. Arriving late on Wednesday, 27 April, Nancy Funk had only Thursday and Friday to contact the major media outlets. On Thursday morning with a list of prior con­ tacts and still more recommended by her sister Tanya Silverman, a New York City resident who worked for CBS, Nancy Funk started calling the national and local news people. Earlier in the week contacts had been made by telephone from Salt Lake City with the major television networks, the wire services and the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. While interested in the story, the response to the long distance calls for the most part was, "Call us if you get here." Following her sister's advice and her own in­ stincts Funk started pushing Lark as a natural David and Goliath story. Every place I called I asked them if they were familiar with Curtiss-Wright/Kennecott. Most of them said, "Yes," and I would say, "I have a human interest story about six people from a small mining town, who have never been on an airplane before, and they've come to tackle Goliath.^07 Her first calls made, Funk hit the streets to meet in person the people she had talked with on the 119 phone. Her first in-person contact was at the Wall Street Journal where she talked with Tim Metz, who was covering Kennecott/Curtiss-Wright and had just written an extensive piece on the showdown. From there she went to the offices of United Press International and the Associated Press. In each place the bureau chiefs in­ troduced her to the reporters covering Kennecott Copper Corporation/Curtiss-Wright. At Associated Press she was turned over to Victoria Graham, who later would write moving accounts of Hilda Grabner's place in the Lark story. It was a circus. I contacted twenty people maybe, calling them from pay phones in drugstores or wherever. I went to three of the four major newspapers, the Journal, the Daily News and the Post, and I spoke several times to the New York Times, Funk recounts. The radio stations were in constant contact and did numerous stories before the stockholders' meet­ ing. And we arranged interviews with Hilda Grabner and Bob Bardsley for Monday. She also worked with the national television net­ works, their local affiliates and the New York radio stations. The local affiliates of ABC, NBC and CBS were interested in meeting the airplane carrying the Lark delegation. I had interviews with them lined up for Sunday night and then Menachim Begin of Israel came to New York to speak at the U.N. at the same time, so our coverage was reduced. 120 The Delegation Story Grows The strategy of the Lark New York delegation was to attach their story to the story of the Kennecott/ Curtiss-Wright conflict, something they managed to do. On Sunday evening, 3 0 April, Salt Lake's KUTV-2 reported the arrival of the delegation in New York. After an up­ dating of the KCC/CW situation, the story switched to the arriving delegation. Here is part of the story dialogue: Anchorman Don Smede: . . . Lark has sent a small delegation to New York to voice its outrage and Sandy Gilmour met them at the airport. Sandy Gilmour: Several residents of Lark, Utah arrived here at Kennedy International Airport right on schedule . . . [scene of plane landing]. Hilda Grabner (standing in terminal): We really hope to get more full answers this trip and if we don't we're going to go a little bit higher this time, we're not going to give up. Sandy Gilmour: Have you been promised meetings with anybody? Hilda Grabner: No, not really, not with Kennecott. And from what the others have been we haven't had much en­ couragement to come along with. But we're going to paddle our own canoes, keep them on top and the oars moving. [Chuckle.] Sandy Gilmour: . . . Kennecott's top Utah manager was on board the same airplane into New York. The people from 121 Lark wanted to have a confrontation with Mr. Pratt but he would have none of it. Bob Pratt: We've told these people they should have a de­ cision before the end of May and that's where it stands. My real concern is making sure Kennecott survives, that's what we're after. Sandy Gilmour: So the people from Lark have arrived but it remains to be seen if they can make a dent on the Kennecott top management in the big meeting here in the Big Apple on Tuesday.108 Gilmour further enhanced the Lark story in a series of candid interviews with Hilda. The interviews were introspective pieces searching Mrs. Grabner's life for her personal experiences and philosophy. In one interview Mrs. Grabner and Gilmour rode at night through Central Park in a horse drawn hansom. They talked, the earnest reporter with the grand lady, and what they said, whether memorable or not, made the scene touching. Early on Monday morning, 1 May, Tim Funk had picked up Denver attorney Bruce Coles at the Salt Lake International Airport. Coles had come to Salt Lake to represent the Senior Coalition in a utility rate hearing that day. Stopping for breakfast, the two were seated when Coles, perusing the Monday Wall Street Journal, found the Kennecott/Curtiss-Wright piece by Tim Metz. The article, under a headline reading, "Kennecott Meeting, Promising Showdown with Curtiss-Wright, Attracts Newsmen" 122 said in part, Mr. Milliken [Kennecott Chairman] . . . might get static from an eighty-one-year-old woman from Utah . . . The woman, Hilda Grabner, is leading a Western delegation that includes four other residents of Lark, Utah . . . The Larkers are upset about an eviction notice posted there shortly before Christmas last year re­ quiring them to leave this year. . . . Mrs. Grabner and the other delegates want to press Mr. Milliken for fair compensation. "There are moral issues involved, says Nancy Funk, a Salt Lake City newspaperwoman acting as the group's pub­ lic relations a g e n t . 109 The delegation kept stirring the pot, telling the Deseret News that they intended to appeal to the human­ ity of the stockholders at the annual meeting. Bob Bardsley said, "It's like Germany and the Jews. The decent people allowed them to be led to the slaughter. I think if the stockholders realize that this is being done to people, they'll have the decency *. stop 4. '4- »110 to it. Responding to inquiries from the delegation, Kennecott's New York office told the delegation on Monday they would have five or six minutes during the stockholders meeting to tell their story. The delega­ tion told the news media their one request of Kennecott would be "serious negotiations" with the company about relocation. They said they were after about $3 million in relocation expenses if the $45,000 per homeowner, $5,000 per renter and $500 moving expenses were added up 123 for the fifty-one homeowners and seventy-five renter households. Stockholders in Human Lives^ ^ The CBS Nightly News carried the following ac­ count of the Lark delegation's appearance at Kennecott's annual meeting on Tuesday, 2 May. We pick up the story at the end of the Kennecott/Curtiss-Wright segment. Walter Cronkite: . . . stockholders of financially ailing Kenne­ cott Copper. Shareholders' ballots will be counted after further court action to determine whether Curtiss-Wright, an aerospace firm about one-half Kennecott Copper's size, can win control of the mining firm. Also present at today's meeting was a delegation from Lark, Utah. Betsy Aaron reports. . . . Betsy Aaron: She is eighty-one and her body is frail but her spirit is a match for any man. So Hilda Grabner has come to New York to confront the executives of Ken­ necott Copper, the men who decided to close down the town where Mrs. Grabner and 360 other people live. Aaron then provided background on the December announcement, why the company said it needed the land under Lark and a segment with Bob Pratt saying at the 16 December news conference, . . . Come back, say a year from today. I think you'll find a majority of these people are very, very happy. Aaron: But four and a half months later nobody's happy yet. Because, say some of the people of Lark, while Kennecott has been meeting with them the company has 124 not told them what money, if any, they will get to help them move and reimburse them with their homes. So Hilda Grabner and a committee of five came to the stockholders meeting today. At the stockholders meeting the Lark delegation waited five and a half hours before they were recog­ nized. Elaine Trujillo and Hilda Grabner rose to speak. Elaine was first, she was frightened and her voice was faint. Chairman Milliken asked her to get closer to the microphone. Elaine Trujillo: My name is Elaine Trujillo and this is Hilda Grabner, we are residents of Lark, Utah . . . "Louder! louder!" came shouts from the audience. . . . On December 14, ten days before Christmas, the residents of Lark were told by Kennecott Copper we would have to evict our homes. . . . "Are you stockholders?" a shrill-voice woman shrieked. "Are you stockholders?" she harassed again. Milliken (from the podium): They have gotten entrance to the room. sume they are shareholders." I pre­ "Are they stockholders?" the woman shrieked more shrilly than before. Hilda Grabner, half turning to the woman and then to the microphone, responded: Yes! Yes! human lives! We are! We are stockholders in There was a swell of applause, a shareholder of­ fered Elaine and Hilda his proxy, the shrieking woman 125 was ruled out of order and Elaine Trujillo continued, only to be interrupted again. Chairman Milliken: . . . I understand what your question is . . . I am very familiar with the Lark situation, I know what the management of the metal mining division is doing. Bob Pratt is here today and w e ’re perfectly willing, Bob, and Hank Kremer, people in the com­ pany, to sit down and work out something with you that meets your requirements. Elaine responded the delegation needed something concrete to take back to the people of Lark, that it had been four months with no promise of anything. Milliken: You can be sure if you come to the Kennecott offices somebody will sit down with you. Hilda: Mr. Chairman, my name is Hilda Grabner and I would like to be positive we will have a concrete answer to take back to the people of Lark. . . . . . . The people have almost been bamboozled into believing there were negotiations going on. They have not been going on. There has been no contact whatsoever with the hierarchy and we want to be assured pos-i-tive-ly, that this will happen before we leave. Milliken: If you come to a meeting in the Kennecott office we will meet with you. Grabner: When? Milliken (sputtering): I-I-I can't tell you what will come out of it because I don't know what your position is but we will have a meeting with you . . . 126 Grabner: Have you not had the paper sent to you that was supposed to be sent to you from Lark? We've been under the impression that the papers have been sent in. . . . . . . Are we now understanding you have not heard about our requests or anything else up to this point? Milliken: I don't have anything on my desk that relates to your situation. Grabner: I think it is disgraceful. I really think it's disgraceful. These people have been put through this trauma, and it has been a trauma. It's been the means for deterioration of health and a lot of other considerations that go with it. And I hope and pray that this dealing in stock, in human stock, will, before we leave New York, materialize so that there will be some positive action. May we understand that will happen? Milliken: You can understand we will have a meeting with you. I don't know what your aspirations are. I can only say we will meet with you and work something out with you. Elaine Trujillo: Who will we meet with? Grabner: With whom can we expect to meet, Mr. Milliken? Milliken: Mr. Kremer, Mr. Kremer, our executive vice president. Grabner: Tomorrow morning, would that be convenient? 127 Milliken: Mr. Kremer will meet with you after the meeting and try to set a time to get together. The classic confrontation between the two commu­ nity residents and the big corporate executive had been held and the residents got what they wanted. Moreover, they had performed dramatically for the national media and won their hearts. Betsy Aaron finished her story for CBS this way: The people of Lark will meet tomorrow morning with Kennecott executives. Kennecott has said it isn't making any promises but Hilda Grabner says she won't leave without some answers. Hilda Grabner (closeup): We are stubborn people. We have gone through so much that from now on we mean business. We are going to keep our price and Kennecott has not yet taken all of our pride away from us and no matter how hard they have tried we will still keep to that pride. Getting Ready for Kremer The Kennecott/Curtiss-Wright question was put on hold by court action which allowed Curtiss-Wright to vote its shares and proxies at the meeting but prohi­ bited them from installing its nominee to the board of directors, assuming it won the proxy contest, until the matter was tried in appeals court. Chairman Milliken, with the agreement of CurtissWright announced the stockholders meeting would recon­ vene on 16 May when the results of the shareholder vote 128 would be announced. Thus the takeover battle was effectively out of the headlines and the Lark battle moved up to take its place. Following the confrontation with Milliken a meeting time was set for early the next morning, 3 May, with Herman H. Kremer, Kennecott's executive vice presi­ dent. Ironically, the delegation had sought a meeting for Monday afternoon, 1 May, with Kennecott and for a time thought one might take place. They had strategized for that meeting and on Tuesday evening found themselves doing it again. Led by Tuttle and with Betty Ortiz and Nancy Funk present, the delegation held a lengthy strategy session. The group wanted to be unified on their position. After long discussion the group agreed: Kennecott had a moral obligation to help, they wanted to speak to someone in authority, ask what recommendations Gene Petersen had made, to stand by their original dollar demands of $45,000 for homeowners, $5,000 for renters and $500 moving expenses, to accept nothing but a written state­ ment and to refuse further negotiation with Gene Petersen.112 Bob Bardsley and Bernie Trujillo, both labor union members, talked of the nature of "give-and-take" 129 negotiations with mining company officials. And though they thought they could handle the Kennecott officials there were misgivings about Kennecott's sincerity. "If they come here with a serious intent to bar­ gain, I think we can deal with them," Bardsley said. doubt very much he [Kremer] is, though." "I Bernie Trujillo said he agreed. Tuttle said, "He isn't going to agree to anything while he is here . . . in terms of price. "One of the things he is going to ask us is what do we have to trade. If he is going to give us a com­ mitment to do anything, what do we offer him in return that we are going to do?" Tuttle asked the Lark group. "Publicity!" answered Bernie Trujillo. "Formal negotiations!" Bardsley added. Emma Jean Howland said, "Well, also they'd get good press, because we could change our press strategy." "So number one, we can give them good publicity," Tuttle said. "Good publicity. Right!" agreed Howland. 113 "Sharpshooting" Leads Nowhere So armed with their agreed upon demands and the promise that a favorable response would result in good publicity for the company, the delegation met the next day with Kennecott in their New York office. 130 Representing Kennecott were Herman H. Kremer, executive vice president, and Ed Dowell, public rela­ tions director. Before the meeting Bob Bardsley had warned the delegation about the practice of "sharpshooting" in management-labor negotiations. Management would try to "pick off" the members of the labor team by aiming at one issue not directly related to the issues at hand in an attempt to confuse and disunify their position, Bardsley explained, cautioning the group that Kennecott - ^ do ^ the same. H 4 might Kremer and Dowell proved adept at the sharpshooting technique. Dowell took the lead for Kennecott and pushed the negotiation aspect. Kremer would play off of him, appearing to be more reasonable as the one wanting to understand clearly "what it is you people want." Tuttle played the lead negotiator for the delega­ tion with some backup from Bardsley. Together they tried to keep the discussion on course, but Kremer and Dowell bandied the conversation about, talking aside with other members of the delegation and conceding often to the need for delay until an attorney consulted on some technical detail. Kremer and Dowell made the meeting pivot on the question of legitimacy. They had neither information 131 enough nor authority enough to make any commitments themselves, they said. More important, they said, was the legitimacy of the delegation. "Are you really the official represen­ tatives of the town?" they asked the delegation. Prior to the meeting the delegation learned from supporters in Lark that two petitions were circulated in Lark against the "Tuttle N.Y. Committee." Carried by Richard Rubright to the renters and Leonard Miller to the homeowners, the petition read, We the undersigned leaseholders of Lark, Utah, feel the Tuttle N.Y. Committee for Lark do not rep­ resent us or our views in regard to our location or settlement. We feel that they are working counter to our best interests and go on record that this group does not represent u s . H 6 Kremer and Dowell said the petition, which re­ portedly forty out of fifty-five homeowners and twenty out of fifty-three renters had signed, indicated there was a "split" in the community. Kremer maintained his ignorance of the Lark situ­ ation, said it was difficult to negotiate with the Lark delegation if they didn't indeed represent the majority. He and Dowell also insisted they had never seen any re­ ports on Lark or their dollar requests for homeowners and renters. Mrs. Grabner, responding to Kremer1s words, finally said, 132 The division has been caused and we feel it's been caused for this shocking purpose. It may be in the name of public relations, but it's horrible and I'm telling you the thing must stop. Honey! We don't need honey. Honey is sickening if you get too much of it. Kremer responded, Ma'am, public relations is merely . . . "Honesty!" Grabner interjected. . . . I s stating publicly what you have already done and what you are proud to have done. . 117 "Exactly, honesty!" she interjected again. The remainder of the morning was spent going back and forth on whether the company would negotiate with individual resident households or through the elected committee, questioning the delegation's legitimacy, Kremer and Dowell maintaining their ignorance of the situation and of any Petersen report. One exchange between Kremer and Hilda Grabner seemed to reflect a series of miscommunications with an ironic twist. Hilda (at the end of a long statement): We have been pushed here and there. A little hint to one who goes in and a little hint to another one. And that's the process of division, it's al­ most anarchy there, it's gotten almost to that point. I mean with the mediator [Gene Petersen], I call him the mediator. Kremer: Mmm, hmm. the media. Yes, there's been a lot of use of 133 Grabner: He's a nice person, a very nice person. Kremer: And I compliment you on your use of it. Grabner: Yes, but we know Gene and we know Gene's tactics and he isn't fooling us at all.HS Adjourning with nothing resolved, the delegation was feted at lunch by Kennecott at a nearby restaurant. Entering the restaurant, Mrs. Grabner was recognized as the lady from Lark and the drinks were on the house. "And I said I would like a glass of white wine," she recalled. Later in light luncheon conversation with Kenne­ cott 's Kremer, he quoted her a line from J. G. Whittier: "Who touches a hair of yon gray head dies like a dog!" Quickly Hilda completed the poem: "March on! he . , „119 saxd. The Delegation "Sits In" Following the morning session and the Kennecotthosted luncheon, the delegation caucused and decided that the company was "playing word games" with them. Rather than continue discussions they announced to company officials they would not leave their offices until Kennecott gave them a firm offer to relocate. The lead story on the KUTV-2 4 May six o'clock evening news gave this account: 134 Anchorman Terry Wood: Good evening. We have some surprising develop­ ments this afternoon from the Utah people in New York City. A group from Lark, Utah is sitting in at the headquarters of the Kennecott Copper Corporation and they say they're going to be sitting there until Kennecott gives them a firm offer to relocate out­ side their town. We have a report on this protest from our reporter Sandy Gilmour in New York. Sandy Gilmour: They met in the Chrysler Building at Kennecott's international headquarters on the 13th floor in a corporate conference room. The Lark, Utah, resi­ dents told their story. Kennecott Metal Mining President H. H. Kremer conducted the three-hour meeting. The group had lunch at a nice restaurant. Kennecott bought. [Scene of group going to lunch.] After lunch things looked cordial enough and it appeared Lark residents might reach some sort of accommodation with Kennecott. But then about 3:30 p.m. [Cut to Nancy Funk in front of building reading statement]. Nancy Funk: Mr. Kremer and Mr. Dowell are playing word games with the Lark, Utah, delegation and we think they have no intentions of reaching agreement with us. We do not intend to go back to Lark, Utah, without an agreement. We do not intend to leave the build­ ing without an agreement which is $5,000 for the renters represented here today and $45,000 for the three homeowners. These terms are applicable to any Lark resident who wishes us to represent them. Sandy Gilmour: So by late this afternoon it seemed like both sides had reached an impasse. The Lark delegation saying it would not leave . . . until Kennecott agreed to their d e m a n d s . 120 In a telephone interview with Gilmour immediately following his report, Terry Wood asked for an update. Gilmore reported that Kennecott officials had gone home 135 for the night saying the Lark delegation was welcome to stay all night. He said the sit-in continued, the pro­ testors "were sticking by their guns," but that Kenne­ cott was going to announce its settlement offer to home­ owners and renters in Lark on May 8. Wood then asked Gilmour: Hilda's sitting there too? this? How's she taking Sandy Gilmour: Hilda says she is very tired and she has de­ cided, the committee has decided, that in the best interests of Mrs. Grabner she should go to her niece's tonight and get a good night's rest. She is eighty-one. And Kennecott says they will let her back in tomorrow morning about 8:00 A.M. New York time when she will rejoin the group inside.121 Sitting In Overnight Kennecott released a statement earlier in the day on 3 May saying that it had "received petitions a few days ago from Lark's homeowners and renters denying that [the] group in New York represents them," and quoted that forty of fifty-five homeowners and twenty of fiftythree renters, 65 percent of the town, had signed it. Kennecott also said it planned to make a purchase and relocation offer at 10:00 A.M. MDT Monday in Lark's Lions' hall. The company also insisted it would continue negotiating with individual Lark residents through the Utah management, in effect saying the New York office 136 had no intention of dealing with a group claiming to . represent the entire town. 122 The statement also said the company would pur­ chase homes and "provide for the needs of the ren- The protesters decided to continue their sit-in when they read the language in the petitions against the "Lark Tuttle N.Y. Committee for Lark." The delegation responded by saying, It was voted at a town meeting— one vote per family— that this delegation should go to New York. We challenge the petitions and the methods by which signatures were obtained. Richard Rubright and Leonard Miller had circu­ lated the petitions. The Lark delegation said Rubright and Miller circulated the petitions and pressured resi­ dents into signing by circulating the petitions at the same time refunds for Lark sewer and water board funds . . 124 were passed out, something both denied. Gene Petersen admitted he got Rubright and Miller to circulate the petitions, and that the New York office had copies of the petitions and the results before the Lark delegation arrived. In his opinion the New York management waited too long to use the petitions to challenge the delegation. Petersen also claimed a big role in the Kennecott countermoves against the sit-in. Once the protest 137 started Petersen said the New York office was in tur­ moil. He said he received "three calls within thirty minutes" from one of the chief New York corporate execu­ tives. He gave this account: The guy was panicked, and he said, "They've pulled a sit-in and the media are climbing the walls like locusts. "What do I do? "What do I do?" I told them to present the petitions and tell the media we would have a meeting in Lark on the fo1lowing Monday.12 5 Knowing their legitimacy was in serious question and that the company had called a meeting for the fol­ lowing Monday, the protesting delegation weighed its options. The group agreed among themselves that they had reached a stalemate. Their demand for $4 5,000 and $5,000 had been checked when the company produced the petition. Emma Jean Howland, in going through a list of the residents, thought those likely to sign represented a majority close to the percentages Kennecott reported. The delegation discussed their dilemma until late in the evening. After reading and rereading Kennecott1s housing and relocation policy statement they came to the consensus they had accomplished something substantive after all. Of the time during the sit-in Bernie Trujillo said, ". . . w e were stunned by the petition for about 138 five hours and then we decided to look at the other side of it and we said we've accomplished everything we ^ . . .126 wanted. The group agreed for the first time they had something in black and white. They knew they were generating tremendous publicity both nationally and back home. Bardsley said almost prophetically of Kennecott, "They're gonna roll with the press, they're gonna roll with it, take the punches of the press. They're not gonna like it but they're gonna roll with the punches." Bardsley agreed the delegation had accomplished something by pressuring Kennecott with the sit-in, but he said, There's no way of knowing whether the pressure we put on 'em had any bearing at all. . . . They'll never tell us and we'll never know. But we can feel within ourselves whether we might have done it.127 Late the afternoon of the sit-in Rich Tuttle, using a Kennecott office phone, called Dan Lopp in Salt Lake City to tell him what was happening and seeking his advice. Lopp told him he thought it was for the delega­ tion to decide how long they should continue their dem­ onstration. However, Lopp did say he would try to gen­ erate additional pressure on Kennecott from the outside. After conferring with Rich iMale of Crossroads Urban Center it was thought a mailgram campaign could be 139 launched overnight. The idea was to get people from different parts of the country to send messages to Ken­ necott supporting the sit-in and denouncing the company. Together with Male and Tim Funk, Lopp started calling the loosely affiliated network of social activists around the country of which Western Action was a part, urging them to send messages. Aproximately 100 persons coast to coast were contacted and asked to send the mailgrams. How many did is unknown but it was another ingredient in the whole advocacy effort. When morning arrived on Wednesday, 5 May, the delegation talked once again among themselves and con­ cluded they should declare a victory and withdraw. The delegation left the 13th floor where they were sitting-in and went down to the Kennecott reception room on the 9th floor where they met a swarm of media people. Emma Jean Howland said to the reporters gathered, "We decided that we had accomplished what we came to do. Kennecott has given us a date and time when they are going to announce their plan; they have agreed to meet with us and our advisers and they have agreed to let us look at petitions they say they have. 1112 8 Earlier that morning Kennecott's Milliken reiter­ ated the company's position: it would negotiate with the people in Lark through the Utah management. Other com­ 140 pany officials repeated their denial of the delegation's authenticity as a representative body, although as Mrs. Howland indicated the company did recognize her­ self, Bardsley and Bernie Trujillo as elected members of the town committee who had a right to be at the 8 May meeting. Sandy Gilmour reported the conclusion of the sitin this way: The eighty-one-year-old Mrs. Grabner spent the night with her niece who lives in New York. The other five Lark residents and community organizers Richard Tuttle and Betty Ortiz spent the night in the conference room up there in the Chrysler Build­ ing on Forty-second Street as the rest of New York hurried by in the night. Initially Kennecott officials thought they had assurance the group would not stage a media event like this. They feel a good faith meeting with Lark residents turned into unfair pressure tactics. By this morning no one in New York knew how a settlement could be reached with Kennecott saying the Lark people could stay in the conference room as long as they wanted. Dan Smede (KUTV news anchorman in Salt Lake City): Sandy Gilmour is on the phone right now and, Sandy, was some sort of settlement reached and is that why they decided to leave New York? Sandy Gilmour: Well apparently, Dan, at ten o'clock this mor­ ning the group left the building and out on Fortysecond Street I talked to them. They said they had reached an agreement that Kennecott Copper would negotiate with Lark residents on homeowner and ren­ ters' settlements and relocation money. There will be a meeting Monday morning with Kennecott; that's at ten o'clock. The delegation seemed satisfied that they did accomplish something. It's been quite a story back East. 141 Dan Smede: Thank you, Sandy, very much, and we'll be look­ ing forward to the arrival of the delegation tonight here in Salt Lake City.I29 The delegation's arrival back home was another media event in a chain of media events. Dan Lopp in reviewing the situation said the most important next step was a "triumphant reception welcoming back the vic­ torious delegation." So one was planned. Family and friends of the delegation were con­ tacted to make sure they knew the time the plane carry­ ing the group was arriving. They were encouraged to get as many Lark residents and others as possible out to greet them home. The news media was contacted twice to make certain they knew the arrival time. Fortuitously, the delegation arrived shortly be­ fore 10:00 P.M. The three local Salt Lake television stations were on hand for live coverage of the return home. About two hundred persons were at the Inter­ national Airport to welcome the deplaning group. There were cheers, chants, big hugs, tears and flowers for the women in the group. Signs were held up saying, "Con­ gratulations Lark Delegation . . . " and flyers circula­ ted carrying the message: Congratulation Lark Delegation on your trip to the Kennecott Copper Corporation's Stockholders meeting. 142 Your achievements there assure Lark, Utah resi­ dents a fair settlement from Kennecott . . . God Bless You All!130 Hilda Grabner was not with the group. She had decided earlier to stay in New York to visit with her family and see the ballet. She would return on Sunday, 7 May, the day before the meeting with Kennecott. Her arrival would create still another event. The Role of Hilda Grabner Hilda Grabner was a media star; the response to her was tremendous. "Champion Granny," "Joan of Lark" and "the bat­ tling great grandma of Barrow-in Furness," the London Daily News called her. 131 Headlines from around the country read, the "Lady of Lark," "Tiny Lady Bends the Might Kennecott's Ears," "Hilda Fights Copper Firm," "Woman Battles Largest Copper Firm," "Grandma Fights Big Corporation For Little 132 People." A Salt Lake Tribune article by Robert H. Woody dated 7 May and titled "Take Care If You Battle With Hilda of Lark, Utah," started this way: NEW YORK— Your cause could be pure and just or feeble and base. But watch out if Hilda Grabner takes you on. Woody went on to say there was no way Kennecott officials . . . "could have outclassed Hilda for public 143 attention." He suggested that since the company was being asked about putting a woman on their board of . . . 133 directors Hilda might make a good candidate. National wire stories about Hilda's confrontation with Kennecott circulated continuously from the time she appeared in New York until after the Lark situation was settled, a period of about ten days. Many of those stories were written by Victoria Graham of the Associated Press New York bureau. Graham, initially approached by Nancy Funk in advance of the delegation, took a liking to the Lark people and to Hilda in particular. Her stories were especially color­ ful and favorable to the cause. Here are the leads from some of Graham's stories: NEW YORK (AP)— Amid glares and stockholder wrangling over profits, a delicate eighty-one-yearold woman with lace at her throat and flint in her voice stood up in the Grand Ballroom of the Plaza Hotel. (May 3) NEW YORK (AP)— It was David vs. Goliath or Little Old Lady from Lark vs. Giant Corporation. (May 4) NEW YORK (AP)— Hilda Grabner is eighty-one, an ex-schoolmarm, miner's widow, tea-sipping grandma with sweet face and folded hands. She's also the silver tongued, shake 'em up mentor of residents of Lark, Utah, an iron-willed frontierswoman who relishes a good fight. (May 6)134 With copy like Graham's playing all over the country, complemented by frequent interviews of Hilda on national television, she became a celebrity. The re­ 144 sponse was overwhelming. Hundreds of cards and letters were sent to Mrs. Hilda Grabner Lark, Utah 84040. The messages of support came from California . . . I admire your courage and tenacity. You are doing all of us a great service by demonstrating to a big industry that they cannot disrupt and up­ root people without causing great pain. Human needs are so often overlooked for progress and profit. Colorado . . . Hang in there Hilda! You make us proud to be women when we read about women with the type of courage you display. Right on! Keep it up! You'll win . . . Alabama I have been watching your stand against the action of Kennecott Copper with great interest. applaud your courage. I saw you on TV on the evening news. I She became best known perhaps for her statement at the stockholders meeting that, "Yes, yes, we are stockholders in human lives. Dan Lopp, in observing the Lark story and playing a role somewhat removed from the day-to-day action, said of Hilda, The thing a person like Hilda Grabner does is she gives people a sense of hope. If you are lucky enough to have that sense of hope come across on the media it is even better. I doubt without Hilda as a media star we would have gotten the media play we did. Access to the people and media who could get things started were the critical factors in Lark. Hilda made that access much easier. She made all the difference.1^6 145 Hilda Returns, Kennecott Does Too 1 Hilda Grabner stayed two more days in New York than the rest of the delegation. She returned home to Salt Lake City on Sunday afternoon, 7 May, the day before Kennecott would make its offer to the Lark residents. Lark residents and their supporters, anticipating another opportunity for extensive media coverage similar to that received by the delegation when they arrived on the previous Thursday evening, prepared a large welcome home for Hilda. About seventy-five residents, friends and rela­ tives greeted Hilda upon her arrival at the Internation­ al Airport. Sporting a big brown-and-white "Utah Senior Power" button given to her by the Utah Senior Citizen Coalition, Hilda was received with cheers and given a large bouquet of flowers. Two young men with beards and heavy bellies were wearing orange day-glo T-shirts bearing the messages "Larkites" and "Lark Power." Everything was quite festive, the welcoming at the airport had the makings of a perfect media event. Except for one thing— there were hardly any media there. 146 Milliken1s Media Event At almost the same time Hilda arrived at the Salt Lake International Airport, Kennecott Copper's Chairman Frank Milliken was helicoptering into Lark to visit with some "pre-selected residents." On Sunday morning the local and national news media following the Lark story were notified by Kenne­ cott that Milliken would be in Lark early that afternoon to visit with the residents. However, only a few resi­ dents known to be favorable to Kennecott were told beforehand and the company arranged for Milliken to see i only them. 137 Milliken helicoptered into Lark, spent about ninety minutes visiting with supporters, told reporters he misunderstood when he said at the stockholders meet­ ing that "nothing had come across his desk" about Lark, and that the residents would find the company relocation offer to be made the next day to be "fair and generous." Milliken called his proposal "both humane and business-like" but only disclosed the company offer to house some older or disabled persons. He also volun­ teered Kennecott would choose an impartial third party to review the fairness of the entire relocation pack138 age. It would later be related by Gene Petersen and Ken Kefauver that the Milliken event was the idea of the 147 Hill-Knowlton expert hired to help Kennecott during the Curtiss-Wright affair. Both Petersen and Kefauver ex­ pressed disapproval of the event. demonstrated "absentee management." Petersen said it 139 As Milliken whirled away in his private heli­ copter, Hilda was arriving for a reception at the Lark Lions Club hall given in her honor by her friends and neighbors. As she approached the Lark Lions Club build­ ing, at the turn in the town's narrow main road, a pulsing swarm of news people, reporters, cameramen, photographers and technicians appeared, literally out­ numbering the fifty or so residents gathered. Hilda got out of the automobile and was received by the members of the New York delegation, family, friends and neighbors. Welcome home signs covered the side of the Lions Club hall and inside gay colored deco­ rations, more flowers, a buffet lunch and more signs greeted the guest. Hilda met with the group talking with each person in turn, giving hugs and handshakes and laughing in the festivity all the time with the cameras rolling and reporters taking notes. Eventually, with the greetings taken care of, Hilda held an impromptu news conference (more like "holding court" in the words of Dan Lopp), and told the news reporters she thought Milliken's visit may have been "a good signal." But she said she and the others 148 should wait to hear if the Kennecott offer "meets our requirements." "We will cooperate," she said, "but we will be firm. We're not going to give up now that we've gone this far. We are out for justice."^0 Again the media had been attracted en masse to the Lark story. And once again their coverage boosted the story to the forefront of the news, providing con­ tinuing legitimacy for the organizing effort while put­ ting more pressure on Kennecott to deliver on its promises. Preparing for the Meeting After Hilda's reception and her session with the news media, the main members of the Lark Kennecott oppo­ sition met in Bob Bardsley's home to prepare for their meeting with Kennecott the next day. Kennecott had agreed that members of the elected town committee and their "advisers" could participate in the Monday morning meeting. Trujillo, Emma Jean Howland, This meant Bardsley, Bernie as committee members, and Hilda Grabner, Rich Tuttle, Betty Ortiz, Nancy Funk and attorney Brian Barnard as advisers, would be in the meeting. The group at Bardsley's, including everyone ex­ cept Funk and Barnard, met with Dan Lopp, Tim Funk and 149 Earl Warner, another Western Action staff member. The committee members practiced for the meeting by doing some role playing. Bob Bardsley portrayed Bob Pratt and Rich Tuttle was Gene Petersen. The rest of the group played themselves and tried to engage the role players in a realistic question-and-answer exchange. Bob Bardsley said at the end of the exercise, "I think it's gonna be a lot more formal than this is and a lot more business manner. There'll be black-and-white statements made to us." 141 Further discussion led the group to conclude that Kennecott arguments about the property values and the features of that offer would be hard to argue against. Plus the company expertise in handling such negotiations would be difficult to handle. Instead of dealing with Kennecott on the details of their offer, Dan Lopp advised the residents that their success had come from handling each situation as a media event and the meeting with Kennecott should be handled the same way. Lopp said, "I think what you can do as a committee when you don't get what you want from Kennecott is [to] use it as a media event again." Earl Warner reviewed the success of the media image the committee and supporters had put forth. He said the group had to be prepared to counter the Kenne­ cott offer. He said, " . . . you have to be ready to 150 counter Kennecott quickly so the story that gets written says, 'We asked for this and Kennecott cut it back.' Kennecott Makes Its Offer 143 On Monday morning, 8 May, Kennecott, represented by General Manager Bob Pratt and Gene Petersen, met with the elected town committee in the Lions Club hall. The New York delegation members and their advisers were joined by Richard Powers as a homeowner, Tiva Gallegos and Pat Sanchez as renters, and Mike Martinez acting as their adviser. It was the first time the full committee had sat together in almost six weeks. Pratt and Petersen were straightforward in their presentation. Basically they offered homeowners 120 percent of appraised market value for their homes. Ap­ praised home values ranged from $2,000 to $15,000 with the average at about $8,000. If the state appraisal figure was unacceptable, Kennecott would pay for an in­ dependent private appraisal. Or, finally, the company would pay homeowners reasonable costs for moving their home. Homeowners would also get $1,000 for relocation and moving expenses. Renters would get $1,000 for re­ location plus $500 if they moved out before 31 August. The $500 would be reduced by $100 for each month a renter stayed after that date. Pratt and Petersen also introduced a plan to re- 151 locate some homes in Copperton to provide affordable rentals for certain "old-time residents, retired work­ ers, widows" and the like. Kennecott would incur the cost of developing the utilities, streets and other surroundings where the houses would be located. The company would maintain a long-term obligation to some of those in its new complex, they promised without fully explaining their commitment. Pratt and Petersen told the committee that a special three-person arbitration committee consisting of a representative from the company, the town committee and a third person chosen by the first two was to be formed to help make adjustments for those in special need. Pratt said in the closed-door meeting that the proposal "is our firm offer. tion. " There will be no negotia­ The general manager said he was there only to represent the company's interests. 144 ink on my shorts," he chuckled. "I've got Kennecott What discussion there was between Pratt and Petersen and the committee was explanatory. position. The two men did not budge off their As Bob Bardsley had predicted, the meeting was formal and things were presented in black and white, something the opposition had been demanding all along. As the meeting proceeded, residents stood by outside the hall with signs declaring: "We are not mush­ rooms to be kept in the dark!" "We Support Those Who 152 Went to New York I" "As Hilda Says— We Are Stockholders in Human Lives." The residents waiting outside were joined by local and national news media reporters and technicians. Before the meeting was over Kennecott officials on the scene began passing out press kits containing a state­ ment of the company's position, the dollar amount of their offer, a history of the Lark purchase and photos of Lark homes. When Pratt and Petersen emerged from the meeting they held an impromptu news conference explaining the basics of their proposal. In response to a reporter's question, Pratt denied Kennecott had ever told Lark residents they would not be compensated for their homes. Pressed by the same reporter as to whether residents "could have reasonably construed" company statements in December to mean no compensation would be paid, Pratt said, "It may be inferred." Pratt told reporters the Lark story had been unfairly reported by the news media. He added, "We weren't going to be blackmailed by any­ one. " Asked who he meant Pratt said he had spoken "loosely" and that Kennecott's decision to offer payment to the residents was "absolutely not" influenced by news ■ 145 coverage of4= the issue. When asked if Kennecott's offer was enough, Hilda Grabner said, 153 I don't think so. I really don't think so. according to the inflation today. I really don't. Because if people have to go out and purchase a home, you know yourself what a home costs. It isn't only that most people would have to borrow. The reporter asked her, "So you are looking for replacement value?" "Yes, replacement value," she answered. 146 Pratt told the town committee and the news re­ porters Kennecott submitted its proposal to Salt Lake realtor-attorney Manford A. Shaw, the retired head of Westminster College. Shaw, Pratt said, provided a dis­ interested third party who could review the fairness and equity of the Kennecott proposal. In an interview Shaw said Pratt and Petersen asked him to review their proposal the weekend before the Monday meeting with the elected committee. "You'd have to be deaf, dumb or blind not to have heard about the Lark story. There was all kinds of fuss and feathers," he recalled, and "the main complaint was Kennecott was being arbitrary." 14 7 Pratt and Petersen were prompted by the criticism in the press to seek a neutral voice to review their pro­ posal and they asked him, Shaw recounted. He recalled that he thought "the people ousted from their homes should have more voice than they were being given. was a question of what is fair," he said. "It Shaw made some adjustments in Kennecott's proposal by adding more op- Not 154 tions for the residents, and he implied he recommended to Kennecott they offer a choice of property appraisals, setting up the arbitration committee and making some improvements in the Copperton relocation offer. How much,if any, Shaw improved the final amounts offered to homeowners and renters he wasn't certain. However, Gene Petersen said his own recommendation was close to what Kennecott offered in Bingham— 10 9 percent of appraised The final Kennecott offer was for 120 percent.14 8 value. Shaw said that often citizens "dealing with a large corporation feel they're getting the shaft." If that is the case, he thinks the press has a place in the issue to "counterbalance" things. Shaw thought the media played an important role in the Lark story and that the media coverage of it was influential in Kennecott's invitation to him to mediate in the settlement.14 9 The Town Decides to Vote Led by Emma Jean Howland, the Lark elected com­ mittee called a town meeting in the Lark Lions Club hall that Monday evening to discuss Kennecott's offer. The hall was jam-packed with over 150 residents and the ever-present band of reporters and media tech­ nicians. Mrs. Howland opened the meeting by going through the Kennecott offer point-by-point. Essentially her presentation showed the company's proposal was too 155 low, in that it would not meet the replacement costs of rental units and homes in the Salt Lake area. Attorney Brian Barnard reminded the audience they faced tax liabilities for their relocation money and the profits from the sale of their homes. At one point the meeting became highly conten­ tious over the question of whether or not the elected committee really represented a majority. This exchange was recorded by KUTV-2 television: Bob Bardsley: There was everybody who was elected on this com­ mittee in that meeting and you know it. Voice (rankled) from the back of the room: You're the one who stirred the whole damn works. Bardsley: We've had some good outside help and thank good­ ness for that. Emma Jean Howland: Myself as Chairperson, Emma Jean Howland, I was elected to assume Leonard Miller's place at an open meeting. (Loud shouts, jeers, boos and applause.) Sandy Gilmour (KUTV-2 reporter): After shouting, jeering and arguing at each other residents got a lecture from eighty-one-yearold Hilda Grabner. Hilda Grabner: If you people will stay united you will be helped, but if you don't, if you follow this other road, you're going to be sad people once you leave this town. (Cheers, applause.)151 156 Although the meeting continued for ninety tumul­ tuous minutes, it was well chaired by Mrs. Howland. Eventually those present opted not to decide that night on accepting Kennecott's offer. Rather they decided to wait until the following Thursday when each household in Lark would vote on whether to accept or reject the Ken­ necott proposals. Seeds for the voting idea came from Dan Lopp and Earl Warner, who advised Mrs. Howland, Bob Bardsley, Bernie Trujillo and the others to somehow prevent any final decision from being made until the entire town had a chance to review the proposals. A vote was an appro­ priate way, Lopp and Warner suggested, for the towns­ people to express themselves and participate directly in the decision-making. On the day following the meeting Emma Jean How­ land worked on completing plans for the vote. As chair­ person of the elected committee she arranged for the balloting to take place on Thursday, 11 May, from 10 A.M. to 8 P.M. in the Lark Lions Club. Howland se­ cured the help of the League of Women Voters who volun­ teered to provide two impartial polling judges to check eligibility and watch over the locked ballot boxes. The committee decided that one vote would be allowed per household. "This is due to the fact we have a lot of widows and widowers in the community. We felt 157 • would be more equitable," Mrs. Howland said. 152 it Homeowners and renters who had lived in Lark on December 14 would be eligible to vote. Kennecott said they would provide a list of names for the judges to use. Authorized proxy votes were also arranged. Campaign Against Approval For two days, 9 and 10 May, the opposition cam­ paigned against the Kennecott offer. While supporters said the company was being generous and the residents should take it and run, the opposition said that the dollars offered wouldn't cover the cost of relocation. Campaigning was done on a personal basis. Oppo­ sition members assigned themselves individual households they would phone or visit. The last Lark Newsletter was published on 10 May. A "Dear Neighbor" letter pointed out the conditions be­ fore the New York trip. It said before the trip the town had "nothing on paper," "no answers," committee meetings were controlled by Kennecott, and town meetings were a joke. Within five days after the delegation went to New York (3 May to 8 May) the town "had answers and $ amounts on paperl!" the letter said.15^ The newsletter repeated the opposition's analysis of what it would cost for renters to relocate, an esti­ mated $1,016 for first month's expenses, it said. 158 Homeowners were warned the average price of a single-family dwelling was $56,300. Bob Bardsley wrote this letter to the newsletter. Neighbor: Don't be frightened by this giant corporation!! Let's unite and let Lark go down in history as the little town that set the precedent for future "lit­ tle towns" that must die in the name of progress. Vote NO Thursday. A factsheet itemizing renter and homeowner re­ settlement costs was circulated through town reiterating the information presented in the town meeting and in the newsletter. On the flip side of the factsheet was a mock stock certificate inspired by Attorney Brian Barnard for "Lark Human Lives Inc.," certifying the owner named held ten shares of "Human Rights" capital stock. Hilda Grab­ ner was listed as president of the corporation. The certificate carried a note across the bottom saying, "This corporation exists only in the hearts of the friends and residents of Lark, Utah.1^ Rich Male of Crossroads Urban Center brought the Salt Lake area religious community into the campaign. On 10 May Male arranged a news conference in which a statement signed by twenty ministers and priests from churches in Salt Lake City, Tooele and Helper, Utah, was presented. Pastor Eldon Micholsen of Midvale United Methodist Church and six other clerics read a statement which said in part, . . . We feel strongly that corporations must assume a moral and social responsibility to the com­ munities they serve. . . . The responsibility of Kennecott is . . . that these homeowners and renters are compensated . . . so [they] can start a new life with peace of mind and security. As individual pastors we are asking the communi­ ty to stand up and support these brave residents in their fight for self determination and justice.^55 The event got heavy news coverage on the eve of the Lark election. Msgr. Patrick Dowling of Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church, where the news conference was held, was asked why he had signed the statement. He told the reporter interviewing him that there were poor people in Lark, and as the statement read, Kennecott had a moral duty to help them as much as possible. Rich Male went to work again, this time with the Priests Senate of the Catholic Diocese of Salt Lake City. Male prompted the senate to prepare and pass a resolution urging justice in Lark. A statement signed by senate president Thomas L. McNamara, OSFS, was re­ leased to the news media. It said, . . . We publicly call attention to the need for a sense of social justice in this difficult matter and remind Kennecott of the moral responsibility to provide for people whose lives and economic security have been disturbed by a corporate d e c i s i Not all public comment was supportive. o n . One per­ son felt compelled to send a letter to the editor which appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune under the title, 160 "Asking Too Much." It read: Editor, Tribune: Hark, hark, the Lark! I hear the same refrain: Since when did renters achieve rights beyond the leasehold? The best I've ever gotten from a landlord is thirty days notice. Period. Last December the Lark renters would have been happy with moving expenses. Now thanks to profes­ sional rabble-rousers they think they have a vested interest in Kennecott, and what's more that benevo­ lent giant seems to agree. Not satisfied with dirt cheap rent for land and houses over many years, some Lark residents appar­ ently think they, like the dead, deserve perpetual care. If I lived in Lark I'd grab the offer and run.157 The Vote is Taken Hilda Grabner was having her home painted on the day of the Lark vote. As residents came by her white frame house di­ rectly across from the polling place in the Lions Club hall they saw it happening. Trujillo on the porch, Three of them were there— Tuttle on the west, and Funk up the ladder— painting away. They painted on during the day as the residents trailed to the polls, some stopping to chat, others just smiling and shaking their heads. She was voting against the company offer and planned to stay in Lark, Hilda said as she watched the crew paint her house. holding out until Kennecott does what is just." "We're As be­ fore, she described "just" to be the demand of $45,000 for each homeowner, $5,000 for every renter. 15 8 161 The news media picked up on the house painting scheme and the photographers and cameramen seemed happy to have something active to shoot. A wirephoto of Hilda supervising the house painting would appear in daily newspapers across the country. By late evening the judges from the League of Women Voters had counted the ballots. The majority of residents voted to accept the Kennecott relocation offer by a margin of two to one. Of those voting, thirty-four homeowners said yes and seventeen said no, and fortyfour renters said yes and twenty-one said no. Three homeowners and twenty-one renters did not vote. "The vote went better than I thought it would," Hilda told a reporter. "Many people were afraid of the company, that's why they voted to accept. Kennecott told some people if they didn't accept this offer it would be withdrawn and they would get nothing." 15 9 A Kennecott spokesman said the company would not have withdrawn the offer and never told anyone it would. However, several elderly residents told the same report­ er they had been led to believe in discussions with Ken­ necott they risked getting nothing if the town rejected the proposal. Another resident who said she and her husband had borrowed $8,000 to remodel their house before Kennecott decided to close the town seemed resigned to the out- 162 come. She said she voted to accept the offer because "it's better than nothing and if you stall around you might get nothing." The woman said Kennecott had of­ fered $5,600 for her house subject to a second private . , 160 appraisal. One elderly woman supported the company. "I think Kennecott is doing a marvelous job and I feel wonderful about it." 161 Bob Bardsley said he was staying. want to stand will stand and fight. have given us more strength. "Those that The numbers would But we'll carry on." 162 Whether they voted for the proposal because they agreed with it or because they were afraid it was the best they could do, the residents had made their state­ ment. The issue of Lark and the relocation of its resi­ dents for the most part was over. By early the following day twenty-four homeowners and renters had picked up their resettlement checks and were leaving town. Those who opposed the plan eventually left too. Rich Tuttle stayed in the community for another month helping those in the opposition coalition work out the best settlements they could get with Kennecott. Bernie and Elaine Trujillo bought a home in the rural communi­ ty of Vernon, Utah, and Emma Jean Howland and her hus­ band and family purchased a mobile home. 163 Later in the year Hilda Grabner moved to a senior citizen housing project in south Salt Lake Valley and Bob Bardsley was the last to leave, eventually moving his home onto a piece of property he owned close to the Lark townsite. As they promised, by mid-July Kennecott announced its plans for building a new block in Copperton accom­ modating up to thirty household units for mainly elderly Lark residents, many of them disabled. At summer's end only a few residents, Bob Bardsley among them, still remained. The trauma and turmoil over, the residents had, in the words of Emma Jean Howland, "scattered like the wind." Had the opposition lost? Not if one believes the words of Hilda Grabner, who told the Associated Press things turned out well. "We never expected to get $45,000. You know when you start negotiating, you start at a higher figure, then barter." Mrs. Grabner says townspeople received plenty of help. "Our going to New York the power of the press both in New York and locally, if it hadn't been for that, we wouldn't have gotten very far at all," she said. Though the town is nearly empty, Mrs. Grabner said Lark is still "beautiful— of course I'm a strange person. "It's tranquil. It'll be a ghost town but it's almost like the calm after a storm. It's summer, the air's beautiful, the world's beautiful and the world's just great.163 164 A Final Round of Comment On 17 May following the Lark vote accepting Kennecott1s offer, Salt Lake's KSL AM-TV carried an editorial entitled "Property Rights and Eminent Do­ main. " It compared the Lark event with another oc­ curring at the same time in which the Salt Lake City School Board was using "the power of eminent domain to take land from owners" for the expansion of a junior high school. KSL said Kennecott offered the residents "of Lark more than the appraised value of their homes, plus gen­ erous relocation and assistance funds." While the School Board awarded dislocated residents the appraised value of their property but no relocation funds or assistance. KSL claimed Lark residents knew when they moved in that they could be asked to move at any time, whereas the residents dislocated by the school board thought they could live in their homes "for the rest of their lives." The school issue generated little attention, but "The Lark incident began a media event. national networks. It was on the Wire services picked up the story. The New York Times and the Washington Post covered it," the KSL editorial said. 165 In Lark "a large industrial firm made use of its own property;" in the school issue "government appropri­ ated private property. KSL wonders why big business became a villain while big government did not." 1 fi 4 As chairperson of the elected Lark town committee Emma Jean Howland felt compelled to answer KSL's quan­ dary on why the Lark situation became more prominent in the news. At her request KSL AM-TV allowed her to respond with her own on-the-air comments. Miss Howland said in her editorial rebuttal the Lark issue grew in the public mind because it was "an historic mining community." And that the story "at­ tracted media attention because of the unfortunate way Kennecott handled the situation." She added the company created "fear and uncertainty" in Lark by its announce­ ment before Christmas that residents had to move and then waiting five months before announcing its resettle­ , 165 ment. proposal. "For a long time," she said, "public bodies . . . have recognized their responsibilities when forcing residents out of their homes. Government guidelines exist to assure some fairness and equity in [such] situations. . . . "Had Kennecott recognized the same responsibility . . . the tremendous national attention and concern over 166 Lark would never have occurred," Mrs. Howland said. Before her editorial response was aired Mrs. How­ land received a letter from Don Gale, KSL's public affairs director. Gale said he had a couple of ques­ tions to ask as an "individual" and a "curious . . . interested observer." His first question asked whether or not the school board issue really attracted less atattention because Lark involved more families. (Howland answered by saying the issue involved an entire communi­ ty rather than a smaller neighborhood). His second question asked: . . . Do you really think Kennecott created "fear and uncertainty," or was it created by the residents themselves, by the agitators, and by the media? As I said, you don't need to answer those ques­ tions. But you ought to think about the fact that literally thousands of people will be asking similar questions when your rebuttal is broadcast . . .166 Mrs. Howland wasn't discouraged by Gale's inquiry and her rebuttal was taped and broadcast. However, Gale's question on who created the fearful situation in Lark was answered at least partially in a commentary by Deseret News Business Editor Arnold Irvine. The arti­ cle, "Moaning Little Guy Casts Giant KCC in the Role of the Villain," made a fair summation of why Lark became such a spectacle. Irvine observed: . . . No one loves a big corporation. It's such a soulless, impersonal, shapeless machine that moves 167 heavily, and sometimes clumsily with little apparent regard for individual feelings or rights. To John Q. Public, the big corporation repre­ sents the hated boss, the despised bully who's al­ ways pushing the little guy around. . . . the big corporation, to some, represents limitless wealth, ruthlessly squeezed from employees and consumers. Anything you can get out of the corporation by hook or by crook you're entitled to, in the eyes of many. • • • . . . In this day of activism and heightened constitutional rights, civil rights, women's rights, minority rights, children's rights and consumer's rights corporations are having a hard time getting away with anything that isn't legal. They all are having a struggle carrying out their legal activi­ ties . The little guy has discovered he has clout . . . [and he knows that when] neither law nor equity is on your side, pound the table. Instead of pounding the table, the little guy can cry foul and get a certain amount of public— and news media support. In the KCC-Lark situation a lot of moaning has taken place and much public sympathy marshalled on the side of the citizens of Lark, threatened, as they are, with eviction. As a result, giant Kennecott has given ground— not because it had to on legal grounds but because it wanted to avoid the Simon Legree image. . . . Legally the company has no obligation to either the renters nor the owners of the Lark homes . . . Everyone in Lark has understood this all along. The company hasn't bamboozled anyone. Still the moaning has had its effect and the little guys have kicked giant KCC in its corporate shins, forcing it to back down from a position of intransigence, based on legal rights. The big company now has indicated a willingness to, in effect, pay the residents to vacate company property . . . . . . Americans, in addition to their sympathy for the underdog, also appreciate fairness. The Kennecott offer, however slowly and grudg­ ingly made, seems more than fair when all the facts are understood . . .16 7 168 No tes ^"Kennecott Lowers 'Boom' on Lark," Salt Lake Tribune, 15 December 19 77, sec. B, p. 1; "Lark Residents Given KCC Eviction Notice," Salt Lake Deseret News, 15 December 1977, sec. B, p. 1. 2 "Kennecott Acquires U.V. Properties," Kennescope (Salt Lake City, Kennecott Copper Corporation), Decem­ ber 1977, p. 12. 3 Tribune, 15 December 1977, sec. B, p. 1. 4 "A Tiny Town's Lost New Year," Detroit Free Press, 27 December 1977, p. 1. 5Ibid. ^Tribune, 15 December 1977. 7 Interview with Ken Kefauver, Director of Commu­ nity Affairs, Kennecott Copper Utah Division, Salt Lake City, 20 March 1980. ^"Lark Move Not Nigh, KCC Says," Salt Lake Tri­ bune , 17 December 1977, sec. B, p. 1; "KCC Not Scrooge, Official Assures Lark Residents," Salt Lake Deseret News, 16 December 1977, sec. E, p. 1. 9 "Lark Advised On Lack of Permanence," Salt Lake Tribune, 17 December 1977, sec. B, p. 3. Ibid. ■^Interview with Donna Bardsley, Lark Resident, Lark, Utah, 4 April 1981. . . "Kennecott Acquires Land, Lark Residents to Move," Salt Lake Jordan Valley Sentinel, 22 December 1977, p. 1. 13 Reference to the author's participation in the 12 story is based upon his review of personal notes, daily schedules and telephone logs made during the December 1977 to June 1978 period, upon the reconstruction of events provided in the interviews conducted and refer­ ences cited. 14 . . . . . Interview with Rich Male, Director, Community Resources, Inc., Denver, Salt Lake City, 13 June 1980. 169 ^Interview with Ed Mayne, President Utah AFLCIO, Salt Lake City, 19 March 1981. 16 Elected committee letter to Lark residents, unpublished, in author's possession. ^"Lark Prepares 'Card' for KCC," Salt LakeTribune, 25 December 1977, sec. B, p. 10. 18T, . Ibid. 19TK.^ Ibid. 20 Hilda Grabner, "The Address to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Consultation, 'Resource Development in the Intermountain West: Its Import on Women and Minori­ ties,'" "The Joys, Hopes, Fears of Futurity and Matur­ ity," Denver, 2 November 1978. 21 "A Tiny Town's Last New Year," Detroit Free Press, 27 December 1977; "Lark, Utah: Copper's Town, Copper's Problem," Minneapolis Tribune Picture, 26 Feb­ ruary 1978; "Death Warrant for a Town," Us, 4 April 1978; "One of the Mines that Helped Keep Lark, Utah Alive Will Soon Be Making Its Grave," People Magazine, 11 September 1978. 22 . . Interview with Bob Bardsley, Lark resident, Lark, Utah, 12 March 1982. 23 "Concern for Lark," Salt Lake Tribune, 6 Janu­ ary 1978, sec. B, p. 2; "Kennecott to aid Lark," Deseret News, 6 January 1978, sec. B, p. 1. 24 . . Interview with Gene Petersen, Kennecott Lark representative, Salt Lake City, 16 December 1981. ^^Mayne interview. 2^Ibid.; Petersen interview; Petersen's contact was corroborated in Interview with Dick Rubright, Lark resident, Salt Lake City, 2 December 1981; Interview with Leonard Miller, Lark resident, Salt Lake City, 8 December 1981. 27 Bob Bardsley interview. . . 28 Dick Rubright interview. 29Interview with Bernie and Elaine Trujillo, Lark residents, Vernon, Utah, 16 March 1981. 170 30 "Committee Up-date," Lark Newsletter, 16...Janu­ ary 1978 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 1, p. 1. ^Mayne interview. 32 Interview . . . with Dan Lopp, Director, Western Action Training Institute, Salt Lake City, 21 March 1981. 33 Ibid. 34 Interview . . . . • with Rich Tuttle, Community Organi­ zer, Western Action Training Institute, Salt Lake City, 20 March 1980. 35Ibid. O/T Interview with Dick Lodmell, Lead Organizer, Western Action Training Institute, Salt Lake City, 4 April 1981. 37 . Elaine Trujillo interview. 38Ibid.; Interview with Hilda Grabner, Lark resident, Sandy, Utah, 23 March 1981; Elaine Truijillo interview. o g Grabner interview. 4 0A copy of the resolution is in the author's possession. 41 Grabner interview. . 42 , .j Ibid. 43 Hilda's role as a source of consolation and assurance and the respect she enjoyed were revealed in the interview with Sister Elizabeth, Franciscan Sisters of the Atonement, New York, Vernal, Utah (telephone), 11 December 1981. Sister Elizabeth, whose duties at the time of the Lark episode included visiting the older Roman Catholics of Lark, was a constant companion and confidante of Hilda's for more than two years. ^"Committee Up-Date," Lark Newsletter, 3 Febru­ ary 1978 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 2, p. 1. 45 session. A copy of the flyer is in the author's pos­ 171 46 . . . Interview with Brian Barnard, attorney, Salt Lake City, 10 April 1981. 4 7Bob Bardsley interview. . 48 Lark residents group meeting, 24 February 1978, Lark, Utah, tape recording made by Western Action Training Institute (copy in author's possession). 49 "Committee Up-Date," Lark Newsletter, 10 Febru­ ary 197 8 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 3, p. 1. ^ L a r k Newsletter, 10 February 1978, pp. 2-3. 51A copy of the flyer is in the author's pos­ session. 52 Barnard interview. 53A copy of the fact sheet is in the author's possession. 54 Interview . . . with Betty Ortiz, South County Com­ munity Action Program community worker, Salt Lake City, 4 April 1981. The Lark Newsletter was issued thirteen times from 16 January to 10 May 1978 and from the 17 February issue on, the newsletter would champion the opposition to Kennecott Copper. Betty Ortiz was the person responsible and her support through the newsletter provided legitimacy to the Lark organizing effort. 55Ibid. ~^"Lark Residents Speak Out," Lark Newsletter, 17 February 197 8 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 4, p. 2. 57Ibid. CO Lark Newsletter, 17 February 1978, p. 1. 59 "Residents Claim KCC Evasive," Salt Lake Tri­ bune , 20 February 1978. 60 61 Tuttle interview. Lark residents meeting, 2 4 February 19 78. 172 62 "Lark Residents Get Ready for Demise of Their Town," the Brigham Young University Daily Universe, Monday Magazine, 27 February 1978, pp. 8, 11. 63 "Committee Up-Date," Lark Newsletter, 2 Febru­ ary 1978 (Midvale, Utah, Community Action Program), No. 5 , p . 1. 64 Lark residents meeting, 24 February 197 8. ^5"Lark Residents Hear Alternatives," Salt Lake Tribune, 23 February 1978; "Homeowners Can Sell or Move Their Own Houses, Lark Residents Told," Salt Lake Deseret News, 23 February 1978. 66ibid. 67 Tuttle interview. 68 Lark Newsletter, 24 February 1978, ibid. (The names of those threatening "Mr. Tuttle and/or his group" are not repeated here because that time has passed and the names are inconsequential to this study. The let­ ter, however, does portray the emotions in Lark at the time. Tuttle was bothered enough by the threats to buy himself a small .22 caliber handgun. 69 Lark residents meeting, 24 February 1978. Ibid. 71T. Ibid. 72 Ibid. 73Ibid. 74Ibid. 75 Bernie . Truijillo interview. 76 "Wrecking Crew Surprises Lark Residents," Salt Lake Deseret News, 27 February 1978, sec. B, p. 9; "Lark's Water Bacteria Free," Salt Lake Deseret News, 28 February 1978. 77 "Residents Speak Out," Lark Newsletter, 3 March 1978 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Pro­ gram) , No. 6, p. 3. 173 78 "Lark, Utah: Copper's Town, Copper's Problem," Minneapolis Tribune Picture, 26 February 1978, p. 21. 79 . . Petersen interview. 80"Post Offices Where Lark Citizens Still Gather," Salt Lake Tribune, 5 March 1978, sec. W, p. 14. 81 p. 17. - Minneapolis Tribune Picture, 26 February 1978, ‘ 82 Interview with Emma Jean Howland, Lark resi­ dent, West Jordan, Utah, 3 December 1981. O^ Lark Newsletter, 22 February 1978 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 8, p. 2. 84t, • , Ibid. 85 "Residents Speak Out," Lark Newsletter, 15 March 197 8 (Midvale, Utah South County Community Action Program), No. 7, p. 3. 86 Author's notes of the incident in his pos­ session. 87Tuttle interview. OO Lark Newsletter, 22 March 197 8 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 8, pp. 1-2. 89 Lark Newsletter, 5 April 1978 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 10, p. 1. 90 . . . . . Information quoted m this section is taken from the Lark elected committee meeting, Lark, Utah, 30 March 1978, tape recording made by Western Action Training Institute; copy in the author's possession. 91Petersen interview. . . 92 . y Ibid. 93 Lark elected committee . . meeting, 30 March 1978. 94 "State Curtiss-Wnght Debate Bid for Control of KCC,." Salt Lake Tribune, 4 April 1978. 174 95 "What Happens to Kennecott Depends on Who Wins the Shareholders," Salt Lake Deseret News, 25 April 1978, sec. A, p. 3. (Reprint of a Wall Street Journal article by William M. Carley and Tim Metz.) 96t, ■, Ibid. 97 Lark elected committee meeting, 30 March 1978. 98Petersen interview. 99 Lark Newsletter, 12 April 1978 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 11, p. 1. ^ ^ Lark Newsletter, 26 April 1978 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 12, p. 1. ^^"Lark Group Asks KCC About Plans," Salt Lake Tribune, 15 April, 1978. 102 "Residents of Lark Seek Aid," Salt Lake Deseret News, 20 April 1978. "Utah Withdraws Action in Nevada on KCC Take­ over Attempt," Salt Lake Tribune, 20 April 1978, sec. G, p. 7. Howland interview. 105 Lark Newsletter, 26 April 1978, No. 12, p. 1. 106 "Group at Lark Presses Issues," Salt Lake Tribune, 30 April 1978, sec. B, p. 5. 107 Interview . . with Nancy Funk, Lark advance woman, Salt Lake City, 13 December 1981. 1OR Evening News at Six O'clock, KUTV-2, Salt Lake City, 30 April 1978. Video tape archive, audio copy in author's possession. 10 9"Kennecott Meeting, Promising Showdown with . Curtiss-Wright Attracts Newsmen," Wall Street Journal, 1 May 1978, p. 20. , IIP "Delegation From Lark to Protest," Deseret News, 2 May 197 8, sec. A, p. 1; "KCC to Hear Problems in Lark," Salt Lake Tribune, 2 May 197 8. ^■^The information quoted in this section is taken in its entirety from the Lark resident group New 175 York delegation strategy meeting, 2 May 1978, New York City. Tape recording made by Western Action Training Institute incorporating group discussion and CBS Evening News broadcast for that date. Copy in author's posses­ sion. 112 . . Lark resident group New York delegation strat­ egy meeting, 3 May 1978, New York City. Tape recording made by Western Action Training Institute. Copy in author's possession. 113T, . Ibid. 114 Lark resident group New York delegation nego­ tiating meeting with Kennecott Copper New York officials, 3 May 1978, New York City. Tape recording made by Western Action Training Institute. Copy in author's possession. 115T, .j Ibid. 116 Copy of the petition (unsigned) in author's possession. 117 . . Lark residents group New York negotiating meeting, 3 May 197 8. 118Ibid. 119 . "Lady From Lark," Lewiston Idaho Tribune, 5 May 1978, p . 1. Evening News at Six O'clock, KUTV-2, Salt Lake City, 4 May 1978. Video tape archive, audio copy in author's possession. 121Ibid. 122 "6 Lark Residents Say KCC Sit-In Was a Suc­ cess," Salt Lake Deseret News, 5 May 1978, sec. B, p. 1. 123 Copy of Kennecott statement in author's possession. 124 Salt Lake Deseret News, 5 May 1978. ^^Petersen Interview. 126 Lark residents group New York delegation nego­ tiating meeting, 3 May 1978. 176 127•, Ibid. 12R Salt Lake Deseret News, 5 May 1978. 2^Evening News at Ten O'clock, KUTV-2, Salt Lake City, 4 May 1978. Video tape archive, audio copy in author's possession. 130_ . Copy m .. , . author's possession. 131 "Champion Granny," London Daily Mail, 9 May 1978. News articles 3 May to 9 May 1978 in author's possession. 133 "Take Care If You Battle With Hilda of Lark, Utah," Salt Lake Tribune, 7 May 1978, p. 1. 134 Original Associated Press wirecopy in author's possession. 135 Copies of correspondence in author's pos­ session . Lopp interview. 137 "Chairman of KCC Visits Lark, Promises Reset­ tlement Offer," Salt Lake Tribune, May 1978, p. 1. 13 8 - "Copper Town Gets the VIP Treatment, Pledge of Fairness," San Francisco Examiner, 8 May 1978, p. 10. 139 . Mssrs. Kefauver and Petersen interviews. 140 . . San Francisco Examiner, 8 May 1978. 141 Lark residents . . group strategy meeting, Lark, Utah, 7 May 1978. Tape recording made by Western Action Training Institute, copy in author's possession. 142Ibid. 143 The account given . . ■ of the 8 May morning session is taken from Lark elected town committee meeting with Kennecott Copper Corporation Utah Division officials, Lark, Utah, 8 May 1978. Tape recording made by Western Action Training Institute, copy in author's possession; "Firm Offers Payments to Ousted Residents of Town," Los Angeles Times, 9 May 1978, Part 1, p. 3; "Lark to Vote on KCC Offer," Salt Lake Deseret News, 9 May 1978, sec. B, 177 p. 1; "Lark Sets Thursday Vote on KCC Offer," Salt Lake Tribune, 9 May 1978, sec. B, p. 3. 144 . Los Angeles Times, 9 May 1978. 145T, . Ibid. 146 Evening News at Six O'clock, KUTV-2, Salt Lake City, 8 May 1978. Video tape archive, audio copy in author's possession. 147 Interview with Manford A. Shaw, Kennecott local arbitrator, Salt Lake City, 23 March 1982. 14^Petersen interview. 149 Interview with . Manford A. Shaw. 150Salt Lake Tribune, 9 May 1978. 151Evening News at Six O'clock, KUTV-2, 8 May 1978. 152 "Lark People to Vote on Offer," Salt Lake Deseret News, 10 May 1978. 153Lark Newsletter, 10 May 197 8 (Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program), No. 13, pp. 1-2. 1 S4 "Lark Residents Vote on KCC Offer," Salt Lake Deseret News, 11 May 1978. 155 "Clergymen Urge Better Lark Deal," Salt Lake Tribune, 11 May 1978, sec. B, p. 3. 15^"Church Resolution Urges Justice in Lark," Salt Lake Tribune, 12 May 1978. 157 "Asking Too Much," Salt Lake Tribune, 16 May 1978. "KCC's Relocation Offer Brings Out Voters," Salt Lake Tribune, 12 May 1978, sec. B, p. 1. 159 "Utah Town Votes to Accept Kennecott Reloca­ tion offer," Los Angeles Times, 13 May 1978, Part 1, p. 10. 160T, ., Ibid. "^^Salt Lake Tribune, 12 May 1978; ibid. 178 ^ 2"Lark Goes 2-1 for KCC Plan," Salt Lake Deseret News, 12 May 1978, sec. B, p. 1. "Lark's Hilda Finds Peace," Salt Lake Deseret News, 3 July 1978. 164 "Property Rights and Eminent Domain," KSL AMTV editorial, 17 May 1978, Salt Lake City. 163 Emma Jean Howland, Lark Elected Committee Chairman, Lark, Utah, letter to Don Gale, Public Affairs Director, KSL AM-TV, 12 June 1978, Salt Lake City. ^ ^ D o n Gale to Emma Jean Howland, 16 June 1978, Salt Lake City. *167 "Moaning Little Guy Casts Giant KCC in the Role of the Villain," Salt Lake Deseret News, 12 May .. .....~....~.'........ ' 197 8. IV. SUMMATION AND CONCLUSIONS Summation The Lark, Utah story was presented in this thesis as an illustrative example of an episode in the emerging undefined and largely unrecognized citizen action move­ ment in America. As part of the citizen action movment, the Lark experience served to relate the movement's fun­ damental characteristics and to show the importance of effective community organizing and communication dynamic within it. Although considerable attention has been given to the various aspects of the community organizing form of citizen action, few, if any, researchers have examined the dynamics of what may be called public com­ munication occurring when a group of local citizens mo­ bilizes for action. Community organizing as a form of citizen action was described and the notion of public communication was presented, defined, and its function and participants discussed. To demonstrate the community organizing pro­ cess and the functions of public communication, the Lark Utah story was analyzed. A combination of primary (in­ terviews, audio tape recordings and video tape record­ 180 ings) and secondary sources (newspapers, correspondence and magazines) was gathered and these, along with the writer's memory of the event as a participant observer, supplied the material used in the historical development of the Lark story, tracing it from beginning to end. No attempt was made in the development of the history to reveal the complete motives of both sides in the con­ flict. Rather, the story, rooted as it was primarily in the community-based aspirations of the Lark citizens group, portrayed their story more completely than that of Kennecott Copper. The Kennecott position was re­ vealed to some extent and a conscious attempt was made by the writer not to characterize the company position. Roughly three phases were revealed in the histor­ ical development. The first phase (mid-December 1977 to mid-January 1978), when Lark residents, aware their town was to close, began to oppose Kennecott Copper Corpora­ tion, organized briefly, gained media attention and then withdrew. The second phase (mid-January to early April 1978), the organizing period, marked the time when a co­ hesive community organizing effort was underway. The third phase (mid-April to mid-May 1978) marked the weeks when the community organizing and public communication were strongest. Conclusions 1. Community organizing usually occurs in local situations on an ad hoc basis over a problem affecting the self interests of community residents in disagree­ ment with a corporate or government body about what is in the community interest. In their effort to seek a solution to their problem the local residents will engage in the community organizing process which features cer­ tain distinguishable steps or phases (problem develops, community responds, group forms, organizer appears, lead­ ership emerges, work with supporters, agenda building, objective setting, strategy planning, action and tactics, and evaluation.) The ultimate purpose of community or­ ganizing is for residents to gain enough power to address the problem facing the community group. This power is realized through successful implementation of the steps or phases in the community organizing process. 2. Public communication in the community organiz­ ing process is the expression in word or deed the orga­ nized community group makes to communicate its concern about political or economic activity seen as contrary to the community interest. Public communication describes whatever the community group says or does in the organiz­ ing process to communicate its concern, win support, and gain the power necessary to be heard and reckoned with. Examples of public communication in the Lark story in- 182 elude: the Christmas card sent by Lark residents to Ken­ necott accusing the company of being the "Grinch," the call of alarm made by the resident opposition when Kenne­ cott started bulldozing buildings in the Lark "heights," Lark delegation in New York— especially Hilda Grabner's plea at the shareholders meeting and the delegation's sit-in— and the call for a vote giving residents a clear choice in the company offer. 3. The Lark, Utah story was an exemplary commu­ nity organizing episode in the citizen action movement: (a) The story follows closely the model of a community organizing to redress an imbalance between a large corporation and the citizenry. A big corpor­ ation made a decision changing the lives of every person in a small community. Individual residents opposed to the corporation's decision got together and, joined by several community groups and a profes­ sional organizer, formed themselves into a cohesive group. From the residents' group leaders emerged, and working with their supporters, they built an agenda aimed at gaining something from the corporation. The group developed a strategy and using various tactics they took the action necessary to achieve their ob­ jectives. Throughout their effort the group consis­ tently studied and evaluated the progress and plans they were making. 183 (b) power. Lark residents successfully organized for The closing of Lark was a local issue in which the residents organized to gain what they thought was just compensation for their homes and community. By acting in their own interest, forming a group and pursuing their course, the opposition gained enough power to force the company to: • recognize them • take a position and offer all residents extensive compensation • allow residents to vote on their offer. (c) The three basic principles of community organizing were successfully fulfilled in the Lark experience. (i) The organizing won real improvements in the residents' lives. Monetarily they al­ most assuredly won greater compensation for their homes and the costs of relocation. In­ dividually they developed as leaders and ad­ vocates . (ii) The residents realized their own potential for power from several sources, most obviously from the strong media response they received, from the response of company offi­ cials to them, from the support they generated in Lark and the community-at-large, from the opposition they generated within Lark, and 184 from the strong sharing evident among them­ selves . (iii) They altered the relationship of power between themselves and the company. At the start the company told the residents what it was going to do without conferring with them. In the end the company met with the residents, explained themselves thoroughly, and then let their offer be voted upon by secret ballot. (d) As a local, democratic, ad hoc group, the Lark opposition had no one political or sectarian basis. The members came together because of their common dilemma, they coalesced on the single issue of being evicted from their town. The tactics and techniques they used were improvised out of expedi­ ence. essary. They used what was available and what was nec­ Person-to-person contacts, flyers, news­ letters, press releases, news conferences, an advance woman, speeches, a sit-in, news events— anything that might work was employed. And support for the Lark opposition came from a network of organizations sym­ pathetic to people in situations like Lark. Western Action, the Senior Coalition, Crossroads Urban Cen­ ter, the AFL-CIO, were each separately and together supportive of the Lark cause and contributed people .135 and resources helpful to the community organizing citizen action effort. 4. The Lark organizing effort was successfully expressed through the public communication practiced by the opposition residents' group. The group effectively communicated its concerns, built a broad base of support, and gained the power to challenge in word and action economic activity the group saw as contrary to the com­ munity interest. As a result the following occurred: (a) The public communication functions em­ ployed in Lark were adequately fulfilled in the or­ ganizing process. (i) Among themselves the Lark residents in opposition communicated their common con­ cern and came to a consensus leading to col­ lective action. (ii) The group communicated its opposi­ tion outwardly to the company and confronted it in many ways. (iii) The group externalized its concern by successfully publicizing it through the news media to the general public and sympa­ thetic supporters. (iv) The group together and individually continued to successfully express itself by utilizing the feedback they received from the 186 company, the community-at-large, and the news media. (b) In practicing its public communication the community group circle of residents, supporters and organizers adequately filled their participant roles. (i) Residents effectively expressed themselves as leaders and members both inter­ personally and in formal modes of word, speech and overt action. (ii) Supporters provided access to com­ munity resources and persons of value to the organizing effort. Supporters also assisted in the development and use of communication tactics and techniques. (iii) The organizer brought the indivi­ duals together, helped them articulate their consensus, focus their concerns, choose a goal and express it, plan strategy and act it out using available tactics and techniques, and reflect on the effectiveness of their organiz­ ing by reviewing the response they received. 5. The organizing and public communication effort in Lark took advantage of several factors unique to the situation including the company's mishandling of the town closing announcement, the subsequent absence of a com- ■ . 187 plete official position, the closeness of Lark to Salt Lake City, a major media center where several well-based organizations and groups with resources and personnel were available, the unqualified support of local priests and ministers, the capacity of Western Action to immedi­ ately assign an experienced organizer, the development of the Curtiss-Wright takeover attempt, the emergence of natural leadership from within the group, and the advent of Hilda Grabner as a media star. 6. The Lark, Utah story occurred when Kennecott Copper Corporation without prior notice to town resi­ dents, or apparent consideration of the timing or impact of its decision, announced shortly before Christmas 1977 that it was closing the town so the company could expand its mining operation. Local residents resisted and be­ cause of their town's plight, the time of year and the company's apparent callous attitude toward the residents, the story attracted national attention as a news story and then subsided. Later a smaller, more defined group of Lark residents started organizing against Kennecott. With the help of supporters from the local Salt Lake area and a professional organizer, the resident group opposing the company decided on what they needed from the company for relocation and then advocated their position in ac­ tions and words, using the general news media as their primary channel of communication. Following a deliberate 188 strategy of attaching themselves to the controversy gen­ erated by the attempt of Curtiss-Wright Corporation to take control of Kennecott, the resident group attracted national attention to the Lark story. Kennecott, suffering a bad image from the start, worked too slowly in coming up with a resettlement offer for the residents. The more time Kennecott took, the longer the organized opposition had to work against them, the worse their public image became. Ultimately, in May 1978, after a ten-day period of intense national mass media coverage generated in large part by the resident opposition, Kennecott made its relocation offer to the town. The offer was accepted by a strong majority of the residents in a democratically-conducted town vote. 7. Participants in the Lark story included three primary groups: the company, the resident opposition and its supporters, and the general news media. Kennecott was represented in Utah by General Manager Robert Pratt, who was in charge when the Lark story first emerged. Pratt designated Gene Petersen as his sole representative in Lark, putting him in charge of the daily affairs of the town and assigning him the duty of composing the company relocation offer. Pratt and Petersen's work was in turn overseen by the Kenne­ cott Copper Corporation New York management, of which the Utah office was a major part. 189 The resident opposition was a core group of ap­ proximately thirty Lark homeowners and renters who were dissatisfied with the company’s handling of the situa­ tion. Although the opposition group had many admitted sympathizers, the majority of the town residents never actively either supported or opposed its activities. Perhaps the opposition's greatest strength outside of themselves came from the local Salt Lake area community groups and organizations which actively supported their cause in various ways, the most important of which was winning the assignment of a full-time professional commu­ nity organizer to assist them in Lark. Together the op­ position residents group, the community supporters and the community organizer actively resisted the company and its representative and in doing so told their story to the general public through the news media. The role of the news media is described in another part of the con­ clusion. 8. The chief protagonists in the Lark story, the company and the resident opposition, each sought to ac­ complish certain things and proceeded in different ways. Kennecott stated its purpose was to close Lark so it could expand its mining operation and get out of the company housing business. The company said it wanted to help residents, especially the older ones, with reloca­ tion, but indicated clearly there were limits to what 190 assistance it would give and to whom. Kennecott's handling of the closing seems to indi­ cate they did not take the unique nature of the situation into account. For one thing, in the past Kennecott had closed several mining towns of its own. However, in Lark they purchased a town owned for decades by another com­ pany and in effect inherited expectations that were not originally their responsibility. For another thing, the company was operating in a day and time when human rights were being actively ad­ dressed as a social issue and citizens were organizing actively to insist on their rights. Given the significance of the Lark situation and the contemporary support for human rights, it appears Kennecott Copper entered the Lark situation without a well thought out plan for closing the town. Management proceeded as if the closing were an internal matter and continued to make mistakes which hurt its public image. From the clumsy announcement in the beginning to the rushed final packaging of the relocation offer at the end, the company seemed to operate more out of expedience than by a preconceived management plan. In effect, the company proceeded day-to-day on the judgments of one man, Gene Petersen, its representative in Lark. Petersen used his own ways to fight for the company, dividing the town residents to combat the oppo- 191 sition challenge while he worked to come up with an ac­ ceptable final settlement offer. While the company wanted the people out and the town closed, the main goal of the resident opposition was to get as much money from Kennecott for relocation as they could. The opposition desired more participation in how Kennecott handled the town closing but their real concern was monetary compensation for both homeowners and renters. Renters were especially important because the opposition organizing effort originated with the renters who were afraid of receiving no help at all from the com­ pany. The opposition proceeded by getting themselves or­ ganized with support from the community and the help of a community organizer. They worked themselves into a posi­ tion of power by establishing a core group with a consen­ sus on what it wanted and then tenaciously pursuing its goal. Using a variety of tactics, the group gained power as residents who supported the company retreated under the pressure they generated. Eventually, with their rep­ resentatives elected to replace company supporters on the town committee, the opposition controlled the only offi­ cial representative body in town. .With their base of power consolidated, the opposition proceeded to use an intensive media strategy to pressure the company into making a larger settlement offer. Their organizing ef­ fort followed the process of community organizing typical 192 of the citizen action movement. 9. The Lark story provides an example of effec­ tive issue-oriented community organizing which can be used in the training of community residents in how effec­ tive organizing and communication can generate access to power. The story also potentially serves as a precedent which corporate and government officials may study to avoid further pain and anguish in similar situations. 10. The mass media played a primary role in the Lark story. Hilda Grabner said it: "Our going to New York, the power of the press both in New York and locally, if it hadn't been for that we wouldn't have gotten very far at all."1 probably correct. She was Without the press, the mass media, the citizen organizing in Lark and its expression would have gone largely unnoticed and less would have been accomplished. From the beginning the residents used the mass media to tell their story to the public. During the Christmas season the residents had everything their own way. Through the public media they sent out the message that the big corporation was picking on the little guy. No matter what Kennecott said it was stuck with the bad guy image. As long as they stayed together the residents were successful playing on that theme. After Christmas the media coverage subsided dra­ 193 matically. This was due in part to the passing of the holiday season and the "aging" of the story. It was also due to the fact that Gene Petersen was in Lark reaching some of the key figures in the community and quieting their fears, thus letting most of the steam out of the loosely-assembled resident protest. Once the formal organizing effort began later in January the use of mass media began playing a larger role in the organizing of Lark. As the residents' group formed they met together and strategized. At each step of their strategy they discussed the role of the media in what they were trying to achieve. They discussed whether coverage was useful, necessary and helpful to their ef­ fort. And the more active they became, the more they ad­ vocated their cause through the media, and the more cov­ erage (and presumably awareness) they generated. As the Lark history reveals, the resident opposi­ tion used the mass media effectively. They became more confident with it the more they used it and eventually use of the mass media was the major factor in their or­ ganizing plans. a media strategy. In effect their strategy became largely As such, the organizing effort became largely media dependent. From the time the Lark delega­ tion went to New York until the town voted on the company offer, the opposition operated off the publicity it could generate. Each episode in that ten-day period— confron­ 194 tation with Pratt in Salt Lake, arrival in New York, the stockholders meeting, Hilda's statement, the meeting with Kennecott and the sit-in, leaving the Chrysler Building, the return home, Milliken's helicopter visit, Hilda's re­ ception, Kennecott's offer, the town meeting, the vote— represented a new opportunity for the opposition to de­ liver their message again. Each episode was a small media event in a larger media event. The Lark story became a media event largely be­ cause the opposition set out to make it one. not a "pseudo-event." tured. But it was It was not contrived or manufac­ Grounded as it was on a well-organized core of Lark residents, the opposition to Kennecott was a real story. The residents found themselves in crisis, they protested, and they used what means they had to tell their story and try to influence its final outcome. As a real life drama the Lark story was made for mass media consumption. Lark was newsworthy because several elements were involved at the same time. It was a human interest story, involving a considerable number of people living in a quaint, quiet little mining town who were being evicted by a big copper mining company at the same time that company was in a struggle for its own independence. The story appealed to many of the basic, enduring values depicted and reinforced in American news coverage. The community represented families, love, 195 friendship, shared traditions, order, individuality and small town tranquility. The company in its apparent big­ ness, without a heart or soul, represented just the op­ posite. The ensuing conflict between town and company was more than the mass media could resist. in with both feet. They jumped The Lark resident opposition con­ tinued to take advantage of the receptiveness in the mass media to the story and to their plight. In fact, they mined it for all it was worth. Did the members of the opposition deliberately manipulate the news media? never. Manipulate, yes; deceive, They were remarkably skillful in gaining favor­ able coverage. This had a lot to do with the believabil- ity of their cause. But it had just as much to do with their cohesiveness as a group in which the members knew and communicated with each other, with their planning and continued sharing of information, with their knowledge of the issues before them, their willingness to take risks and their collective sense of good timing and improvisa­ tion. In essence, their instinctive sense of public com­ munication. What the Lark opposition group was saying was accurate and true, and the way they said it came through loud and clear. Witness one Hilda Grabner. mass media received this willingly. The Their job was to give a factual, balanced accounting of the conflict and hopefully interest and entertain their audience at the 196 same time. They were able to be both factual and enter­ taining. Certainly some of the portrayal was embel­ lished. Features on the tranquil little town, stories on the feisty, two-fisted grandma who spoke the truth and the dramatic, if somewhat futile, sit-in at the corporate offices serve as examples. The Lark opposition was re­ sponsible for the story becoming known and for promoting it and taking advantage of the situation. How they were portrayed was the doing of the media themselves. Responsibility for the story becoming a spectacle probably rests just as much with Kennecott itself. company simply mismanaged its public relations. The It was not prepared at the time of its announcement of the town closing, and saddled with that bad image it did little to repair it by delaying for almost six months its public commitment of a settlement offer to the townspeople. The company blundered when its head official said he had nothing on the Lark situation and then helicoptered into town for an obvious media stunt, a real pseudo-event. The New York management even bungled the challenge to the Lark delegation by failing to present petitions denounc­ ing them until it was too late to make any difference. All of this equals media manipulation that didn't succeed. In the opinion of the author, the organized oppo­ sition in Lark used the media successfully to advocate their cause. The media responded favorably because the 197 story was true, authentic and dramatic. The company— in spite of what its true intentions might have been or how fair the final settlement was— bungled its communication effort and that part of their corporate responsibility. As a single case it is beyond the limits of this study to determine if the elements described for public communication in community organizing are unique or will generalize to other situations with similar conditions. However, the study does provide an example of the operat­ ing elements of public communication and the sequence of events which occurred in a community organizing effort taking place over an appreciable period of time. As such the Lark story may serve as a model to be studied by those involved in similar situations. 198 Note s ^""Lark's Hilda Finds Peace," Salt Lake Deseret News, 3 July 1978. 200 . Chronology December 1977 1 December Kennecott Copper Corporation acquires from UV Industries, Inc. (formerly United States Smelting Re­ finery and Mining Co.) the townsite of Lark, Utah and other adjacent mining properties. Acquisition concludes a previous agreement signed in September 1962 by which Kennecott in 1972 acquired properties surrounding Lark with provision to receive the Lark section in 1992. In the section purchased are seventy-nine company-owned houses and housing units, and fifty-four individually owned units. 14 December, Wednesday Kennecott calls Lark town meeting at LDS Ward Chapel to announce its purchase of Lark and its plans to close the town by 31 August 1978. Soren A. Barrett and Keith Taylor represent KCC and tell resident homeowners and renters, the company has no plans to compensate them. Barrett quoted as saying company ". . . is not in the real estate business." Residents are shocked, news media reaction reaches national level, public response is strong in favor of residents. 15 December, Thursday Mike Martinez, attorney, former resident and in- 201 formal advisor to Lark residents, encourages Utah Senior Coalition to become involved in Lark. 16 December, Friday Robert N. Pratt, KCC Utah Copper Division General Manager, calls news conference to explain timing of closure announcement. Rumors were circulating, he says, and some residents thought they must move by 1 January. Some reference made to KCC plans to handle situation. National media attention remains high. 21 December, Wednesday Approximately 200 residents and others meet at LDS ward house to elect six-member committee to repre­ sent them. Three homeowners (R. Bardsley, L. Miller, R. L. Powers) and three renters (R. Rubright, C. Gallegos, P. Sanchez) chosen. Meeting is generally conciliatory in tone, run primarily by Martinez. Others, such as Utah AFL-CIO director Ed Mayne, appear and offer residents support. 24 December, Saturday Residents committee elected 21 December calls news conference in Lark. Display Christmas card pre­ pared by Donna Bardsley to be sent to KCC. Company depicted as "Grinch-like" figure stepping on the town. Rubright and other five committee members say they will 2 02 approach company for help and say they know their homes in Lark "aren't worth anything anymore." 27 December Richard Male, Crossroads Urban Center, Salt Lake City, contacts Utah Senior Coalition relating inquiry to him from Pastor Eldon Michelson, Midvale Methodist Church, regarding help for residents. Male and Senior Coalition director, Tim Funk, meet with Pastor Michelson and interview two Lark members of his congregation. Soon afterward, Male and Funk contact the Western Action Training Institute about further involvement. 15-31 December South County Community Action Program assigns two part-time staff to Lark on daily basis. National and local news media coverage continues with major national television accounts and several local newspaper feature articles. January 1978 Letter from elected residents' committee circu­ lates detailing the election of representatives and the desire of the committee to meet with KCC and negotiate, especially for senior residents. mary committee advisor. Martinez remains pri­ 6 January, Friday KCC announced opening of its Lark field office, J. E. "Gene" Peterson assigned as company representative. 9 January, Monday Water Committee sends letter to residents saying service will be continued. 2-5 January Dan Lopp and Tim Funk tour Lark, talk with resi­ dents, visit local bar, exploring possibility of placing Western Action field organizer in Lark. 7 January, Saturday Western Action Training Institute Board Meeting, Salt Lake City. Rich Tuttle, community organizer, as­ signed to Lark. 16 January Lark residents' committee meets with KCC's Peter­ son to discuss situation. He says KCC will interview individual homeowners and renters before any decision or offer is made. 18 January Residents committee meets with residents at Lark Lions Club building to describe KCC interview plans. Contention exists as to whether or not residents should 204 accept KCC approach or even move at all. made about outsiders interfering in Lark. Statements Many outside group representatives are present including South County Community Action Program, Senior Coalition, Salt Lake Community Action Program, Utah Legal Services and West­ ern Action. 20 January Western Action field organizer Richard Tuttle begins full-time work in Lark. 28 January, Saturday Lark Newsletter #1 reports resident committee 16 January meeting with KCC and subsequent 18 January community meeting. Letter-to-editor cautions against immediate acceptance of KCC and advises using help of Utah AFL-CIO. South County CAP staff hours in Lark announced. February 3 February Lark Newsletter #2, committee update announce homeowners interviews almost complete (fifty of fifty one) with renter interviews slower (twenty-one of some seventy-two). February. Property appraisal to start during Next town meeting when interviews complete. South County CAP Lark survey results. I "Speak out" 2Q5 letters caution against KCC, ask for independent property appraisal. 6 February, Monday Renters meeting at Catholic Church discuss range of options (legal, political, moral) which renters have. Salt Lake attorney Brian Barnard explains options to those present. 10 February Lark Newsletter #3. Rubright update reports dis­ satisfaction with committee representation. Last day for interviews is 17 February, only twenty-nine of seventy-two renters interviewed to date. "Speak out" letters: one supporting Mike Martinez sent by Tiva Gallegos, who typically sits in on resident committee for her husband Joe; second letter warned against "strange faces invading community promising $1,000 in settle­ ment." Also letters from Utah Senior Legal Services offer assistance, from South County CAP director, Cammy Dunn, denying any working arrangements with West­ ern Action and Tuttle. 13 February, Monday Renter-homeowner meeting, Catholic Church Hall, Salt Lake City attorney Brian Barnard presents partici­ pants information about similar relocation situations, 206 talks about various options and strategies. Renters voice strong concern over poor representation on commit­ tee. Decide to support Bernie Trujillo as their representative. 17 February Lark Newsletter #4. Dick Rubright resigns Lark residents committee, citing personal and family pres­ sure. Meeting Wednesday, 22 February, for election to fill vacancy. "Speak out" letters mention town split forming and question veracity of Tiva Gallegos as a renter representative. Last day for resident inter­ views . 19 February, Sunday News release made through renters group charge KCC as being "evasive," and says company employees inconsistent in their interviews with residents. Re­ ceives some media response. 21 February, Tuesday Town meeting held, some seventy-five residents present, plus TV and newspaper reporters and representa­ tives from South County CAP, Western Action, and the Senior Coalition. renters. dents: Bernie Trujillo elected to represent M. Martinez presents "alternatives" to resi­ (1) sell, (2) move home to Copperton; talks about 207 home appraisals, KCC jobs made available to some resi­ dents. Says "renters have no rights." Renters hostile to Martinez, say KCC bought responsibility for renters with UV purchase, passing back to HUD, costs for re­ placement are high, move to company-owned land in Copperton repeats current problem. Informal discussion afterwards between Martinez, Western Action and Senior Coalition ends in acrimony. Split between pro-KCC and renter-based opposition groups broadens. 23 February Lark South County CAP social and buffet at Rec. Hall with committee members, residents, Ed Mayne of the AFL/CIO, Craig Peterson (Democratic Congressional candi­ date) , Congressman Dan Marriott (by phone), Orrin Hatch staffer. Emma Jean Howland and Tuttle join forces. 24 February Lark Newsletter #5. Update on 21 February town meeting and Trujillo election. Letter from Trujillo to residents is conciliatory in tone, seeks answers to questions. Letters: Tiva Gallegos defends hanging up, not giving out "any information to Tuttle." for help. Renter asks Robert Tincher letter warns against "out-of­ staters," and fear; any "communist inspired group," or any planned visit by "Mr. Tuttle and/or his group" to 208 his home. 25 February Bernie Trujillo assumes his leadership role. He and others go door-to-door in Lark. 27 February, Monday KCC starts demolishing vacant rental units in "Lark Heights" complex at the top of town, puncturing a water line in the process. Renters in complex alarmed. Bernie Trujillo notifies news media, says KCC has not informed anyone. Residents understood KCC wouldn't start demolition work until 31 August deadline passed. News media response was strong. Other groups (Western Action, Senior Coalition) raise questions about water quality and resident safety. 27 February Monday Magazine, BYU student publication, in Lark story state KCC's Peterson and Ken Kefauver say no defi­ nite commitments or proposals will be made before early spring. Martinez on the contrary is reported as saying KCC knows what it will offer resident homeowners. ther indications that renters are not included in settlement. Fur­ 209 March 3 March, Friday Lark Newsletter #6: Editorial states everyone is a renter and KCC should buy or move structures. Identi­ fies three groups: seniors, renters, homeowners; de­ scribes relocation assistance standards, cites unity as only answer. Weekend social reported. Speak out letters; Richard L. Powers about Heights demolition, anonymous letter saying the demolition was a good thing. Ed Mayne letter citing sense of community, anger and frustration, KCC moral obligation, union and unity, pressure on committee to be representative. letter supporting Bernie Trujillo, Cammy Dunn cites unity, work with other groups, C. Petersen, Mayne, S. I. Lester, and gives tacit acceptance of Tuttle and Senior Coalition. 12 March Western Action, Senior Coalition news release accusing KCC of causing ill health and death cites pressure and stress caused by uncertainty of KCC plans. Media response is negligible. 14 March, Tuesday ' Town meeting called by resident committee. Con­ frontation with R. Powers as to presence and partici­ pation of Tuttle and Funk. Powers threatens to throw them out bodily; others present resist. Meeting con- 210 tinues. Main discussion about the Heights demoli­ tion, general feeling is it should stop. Motion passes that KCC should cease mowing down buildings until people move. Motion saying homeowners should ask for $45,000 per house also passes. 15 March Petersen gives his recommendations to Kennecott Salt Lake office. Lark Newsletter #7 cites KCC obliga­ tion to provide relocation help. Historical supplement included mentions "happy and contented community" in early 1900s. 17 March, Friday Renters meeting in Catholic Church. Bernie Tru­ jillo, Tiva Gallegos and Pat Sanchez, renter representa­ tives on residents committee, are present. Renters suggest $5,000 standard for moving expenses following federal relocation guidelines, moving expenses, free rent to 31 August. Committee representatives criticized as being too "owner" oriented; since homeowners have Martinez as adviser, Tuttle is nominated as offical "renter" advisor. elected 17-5. Sanchez and Trujillo leave. Tuttle Negotiation standards presented. f If - . . ■ . . . . 23 March, Wednesday Residents committee meets with KCC. commitments made by company. No final Peterson reported, saying 211 fte Has sent his recommendations to tne main office. There is no report back, he says, but adds he expects the company offer to come by early or mid-May. Bardsley thinks Utah KCC office is in agreement. 22 March Lark Newsletter #8. Reports L. Miller disagree­ ment with first report on demolition motion, also re­ ports renters meeting, standards for settlement and com­ plete listing of federal relocation guidelines. Kenne- cott/Curtiss-Wright (CW) confrontation begins. 29 March, Wednesday . Lark Newsletter #9. Announces town meeting next evening, features story of Salt Lake School District relocation issue similar to Lark. Reports on KCC/CW battle. 30 March L. Miller resigns from residents committee be­ cause of a "certain party in town," (referring to Tuttle). Elected residents committee meets with Bardsley and Trujillo only members present. Barnard, Tuttle, Funk, and Ortiz also attend. Attorney Election set for replacement of Miller; "Public Relations Committee" (PR) elected with Elaine Trujillo, Emma Jean 212 Howland, and Ruth Trujillo as members and Hilda Grabner as advisor. Bardsley reports on last meeting with KCC. Peterson reaction to dollar amounts agreed to by towns­ people is, "they must be smoking some funny stuff . . . " Some discussion of improvements made by individual homeowners with the encouragement of UV and then KCC. Will there be compensation? Supreme Court. KCC/CW issue in Utah Suggestion made of sending a delegation to KCC stockholders meeting in New York City on 2 May. April 5 April, Wednesday Lark Newsletter #10: Miller resignation letter; report of 30 March town meeting; replacement election planned, PR committee set up, meeting with KCC reported by Bardsley, demands no surprise to Peterson, note of Dan Valentine Tribune columnist, expression of solidar­ ity with Lark people; letter from B. Trujillo asks for moral issue challenge to KCC instead of fighting among residents, make news media aware; update KCC/CW con­ flict. CW asked how it would handle the Lark situation; no clear commitment. 6 April, Thursday Lark PR committee meeting at Utah AFL-CIO offices 213 attended by Trujillos, Bardsley, Howland, Ortiz, Tuttle, Funk, Mayne and Tim Rice. how to put pressure on KCC. strongest factor. discussion centers on News media thought single KCC stockholders May meeting featur­ ing showdown with CW identified as opportune time to attract national attention to local issue. Decided it would be recommended residents support a Lark delegation to New York. 6-10 April Flyer circulates in Lark threatening Ku Klux Klan retaliation towards those organizing against KCC. 12 April Lark Newsletter #11: Notice about how to report "hate mail" to FBI, announces 13 April election to re­ place Miller on committee, history of Lark postal ser­ vice, more KCC/'CW updating. 13 April Town meeting held, Emma Jean Howland elected to replace L. Miller on committee, residents vote to send delegation to New York for KCC stockholders meeting. Preparations made for accepting donations to the dele­ gation, fund raising gets underway. Mission of dele­ gation is to get "national publicity and national support. 15 April, Monday Lark PR committee members demand KCC reveal de­ tails of resettlement recommendations made to KCC New York office, say company has kept them in the dark for four months and should not force them into debt. 18 April Tuttle, Tim and Nancy Funk, meet to plan ad­ vance publicity for Lark delegation. Decide to send N. Funk to New York three to four days prior to 2 May stockholders meeting to prompt media attention for the delegation. Preliminary press packet materials list made. 20 April „ PR committee makes public appeal for donations to New York delegation; limited response. 21-28 April Miller and Rubright acting as members of water committee circulate petition against "Tuttle Lark Dele­ gations" at the same time they return deposits paid for water service. Petitions given to KCC's Peterson and forwarded to KCC's New York office. 27 April-1 May Nancy Funk arrives in New York City, begins to make news media contacts about Lark delegation coming to 215 KCC stockholders meeting, Tuesday, 2 May. 29 April, Saturday Lark town committee members and supporters at­ tempt meeting arranged with KCC's Pratt at company of­ fice in downtown Salt Lake City. Delegation, accom­ panied by news media, is turned away by Pratt. sion of no meeting is bad for KCC. Impres­ Confrontation emphasizes Lark delegation departure to New York the following day. Residents say they expect a "more sympathetic" response in New York. 30 April, Sunday Lark delegation departs for New York, it is com­ posed of Bob Bardsley, Emma Jean Howland, Bernie and Elaine Trujillo, Ruth Trujillo, Hilda Grabner, Rich Tuttle, Betty Ortiz. May 1 May, Monday Lark delegation in New York. Media contacts con­ tinue; several individual interviews with New York media and AP reporter; also Salt Lake media continues coverage, Sandy Gilmour with Hilda in Central Park. National television contacts made. Community contacts with New York labor, church and advocacy groups to stabilize local support. Wall Street Journal carries 216 KCC/CW article, mentions potential showdown between delegation, Hilda and KCC at stockholders meeting. KCC after contact from delegation says it can have five minutes to speak at stockholders meeting. Delegation tells media they seek sympathy of stockholders because management has made no commitments since 14 December announcement. 2 May, Tuesday KCC Annual Stockholders Meeting, Plaza Hotel, Grand Ballroom. contingent. CW challenge attracts large news media Lark delegation prepares statement to be made by Elaine Trujillo, Hilda Grabner. Five hours into meeting (3:00 PM E.S.T.) they speak, Hilda's "stockholders in human lives" draws national coverage and a promise from KCC Chairman Frank R. Milliken, for meeting next day with the delegation. Afterwards, national and Salt Lake based media attention intensi­ fies, more individual interviews. Delegation plans for meeting the next day with KCC. 3 May, Wednesday Lark delegation meets with KCC Executive Vice President H. H. Kremer and Edwin E. Dowell, Public Relations Director. Morning session held; KCC hosts lunch; return for afternoon discussion. Delegation decides talks are inconclusive and votes to hold sit-in 217 at KCC offices. KCC releases statement: company will announce offer to residents 8 May, also contends New York delegation not representative of group, releases figures obtained on petition circulated by Water Commit­ tee during previous week. Media are greatly stimulated by the sit-in; KCC New York management is reportedly in near panic. After Mrs. Grabner leaves at 8:00 PM, dele­ gation continues sit-in through the evening with little direct communication to outside. Nancy Funk delivers statement to news media as to purpose of action. 4 May, Thursday Delegation ends sit-in saying it achieved what it wanted: recognition by KCC and agreement to meet on Monday, 8 May in Lark. Group returns to Salt Lake to tumultuous welcome and extensive local news coverage, continue demand for $45,000 homeowner, $5,000 renter settlement standard. KCC's Kremer notes they want nego­ tiations to continue through Utah Division--"It has been in their hands all along." 5 May, Friday Delegation back in Lark; national press begins to arrive, local television coverage continues. 6 May, Saturday Preparations made for Hilda Grabner's return Sun- 218 day. More strategy meetings among Lark delegation and supporters. 7 May, Sunday Hilda returns to Salt Lake City, received at air­ port by large group of residents and supporters, media persons small in numbers. KCC Chairman, Frank Milliken, arrives in Lark by helicopter at same time Hilda is arriving at International Airport. Spends ninety min­ utes in Lark assuring residents that KCC will make good offer. Visits "pre-selected" families, "to set record straight." Denies the visit is a staged "media event." Company contacted all national and local news media, but didn't tell residents. reception at Lions Hall. Hilda returns to Lark to a Fifty to sixty persons attend. National and local media literally swarm over the reception, squabbles break out between reporters, cameramen, and photographers for positon. eloquent. Hilda is Strategy session follows involving delega- . tion and various boosters. 8 May, Monday 10:00 a.m. KCC1s Pratt and Peterson present com­ pany offer for homeowners and renters to Lark residents committee. Elaine and Bernie Trujillo, Ruth Trujillo, Bob Bardsley, Pat Sanchez, Joe Gallegos, Dick Powers, Hilda Grabner present as residents. Brian Barnard, Betty Ortiz, Rich Tuttle, Nancy Funk present as advisors for those in New York delegation. tinez present representing others. actual meeting. Mike Mar­ Press excluded from Offer made falls short of standard demands endorsed by townspeople in 30 March meeting. KCC well prepared with extensive press kits, several staff available with prepared answers to most questions. However, Pratt touchy on some issues. son address media after meeting. Pratt and Peter­ Large resident showing of opposition, numerous signs, some catcalls, grumbles at Pratt's public responses. Pratt estimates cost of offer at $1-2 million or "even double that." Residents committee led by Emma Jean Howland call town meeting for same evening to discuss the offer. Meeting is tumultuous but well chaired by Howland, who goes through the offer point by point. Residents decide to put the offer to a vote on the following Thursday, 11 May. 9 May Hilda article appears in London Daily Mail. Delegation members campaign against accepting the offer by circulating flyers explaining the cost of relocation, through phone calls to each resident or personal visits. Supporters wage their own campaign for acceptance. 10 May Campaigning continues. Lark Newsletter #13 announces election time and monitoring by Salt Lake League of Women Voters. "Dear neighbor" letter notes several points about New York trip and KCC offer, costs of moving, costs of replacement; Bob Bardsley letter urges a "no" vote. Clergy news conference at Lourdes Parish recreation hall in Salt Lake urges Lark residents to hold out for a better deal. Twenty clergymen sign statement, seven appear at news conference led by Pastor Eldon Nicholson, Midvale United Methodist Church, whose congregation includes Lark. Catholic Msgr. Patrick Dowling, when asked by a reporter if the Catholic dio­ cese supported the organizing effort in Lark, says yes, when there are poor people involved the church must help them gain their rights. Priests Senate of Utah Catholic Diocese makes similar statement. 11 May, Thursday Polls open 10:00 AM. Friends of Hilda Grabner paint her white frame home in support of her stand not to move until she gets a fair settlement. Act becomes symbolic of Lark KCC opposition and picture appears in newspapers across the country and on national tele­ vision. is good. General attitude in town is upbeat and turnout Final vote is 2-1 in support of KCC offer. Bardsley, Grabner, Howland say they will continue to fight for a fair settlement and make certain residents 221 are aware of what the offer represents. 12 May, Friday Deseret News business article, "Moaning Little Guy Casts Giant KCC in role of Villain," presents summation of the Lark residents' public relations ef­ fort. Richard Powers resigns residents committee. begins paying renters and homeowners. KCC BIBLIOGRAPHY Published Materials Alinsky, Saul, Reveille for Radicals, New York: Random House, 1969. . Rules for Radicals, New York: Random House, .1971. Barber, James David, Citizen Politics: An Introduction to Political Behavior, Chicago: Markham Publish­ ing Co., 196 9. Barbrooke, Alex and Bolt, Christian, Protest and Power in American Life, Oxford: Martin Robertson, 198 0. Boyte, Harry C., The Backyard Revolution, Understanding the New Citizen Movement, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1980. Center, Alan H. and Walsh, Frank E., Public Relations Practices: Case Studies,2nd ed., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Kahn, Si, How People Get Power, Organizing Oppressed Communities for Action, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 197 0. ________ . Organizing, A Guide for Grassroots Leaders, New York: McGraw Hill-Paperbacks, 1982. Miller, Mike, The Ideology of the Community Organization Movement, San Francisco: Organizing Training Center, 1979. Nimmo, Don D. and Sanders, Keith R., eds., Handbook of Political Communication, Beverly Hills, Califor­ nia: Saye Publications, 1981. Steinburg, Charles S., Public Relations: The Creation of Consent, New York: Hastings House, 1975. Simon, Raymond, Public Relations Concepts and Practices, Columbus, Ohio: Grid Publishing, 198 0. 223 Trapp, Shel, Dynamics of Organizing, Chicago: National Training and Information Center, 1976. Vogel, David, Lobbying the Corporation, Citizen Chal­ lenges to Business Authority, New York: Basic Books, 1978. Articles Bernays, Edward I., "Social Responsibility of Business," Public Relations Review, Winter, 1973. Glasser, Melvin, "Public Relations," Encyclopedia of Social Work, 1971 ed. "Kennecott Acquires U.V. Properties," Kennescope, Salt Lake City: Kennecott Copper Corporation, Decem­ ber 1977, p. 12. Lipsky, Alan, "Protest as a Political Resource," Ameri­ can Political Science Review, December 1968. Newspapers and Newsletters "Champion Granny," London Daily Mail, 9 May 197 8. "Copper Town Gets the VIP Treatment, Pledge of Support," San Francisco Examiner, 8 May 1978. "Firm Offers Payments to Ousted Residents of Town," Los Angeles Times, 9 May 1978. "Kennecott Acquires Land, Lark Residents to Move," Salt Lake Jordan Valley Sentinel, 2 2 December 1977. "Kennecott Meeting Promising Showdown with CurtissWright Attracts Newsmen," Wall Street Journal, 1 May 1978. "Lady from Lark," Lewiston Idaho Tribune, 5 May 1978. Lark Newsletter, 16 January to 10 May 1978, Midvale, Utah, South County Community Action Program, No. 1-13. "Lark Residents Get Ready for Demise of Their Town," Daily Universe Monday Magazine (Brigham Young University), 27 February 1978. 224 "Lark, Utah: Copper's Town, Copper's Problem," Minneapo­ lis Tribune Picture, 26 February 1978. Salt Lake Deseret News, 15 December 1977 to 15 August 1978 inclusive. Salt Lake Tribune, 15 December 1977 to 1 June 1978 inclusive. "Tiny Town's Lost New Year, A," Detroit Free Press,27 December 1977. "Utah Town Votes to Accept Kennecott Relocation," Los Angeles Times, 13 May 197 8. Interviews Bardsley, Bob. Lark resident. Lark, Utah, 4 April 1981 and 12 March 1982. Bardsley, Donna. 1981. Barnard, Brian. 1981. Lark resident. Lark, Utah, 4 April ‘ Attorney. Salt Lake City, 10 April Elizabeth, Sister. Franciscan Sister of the Atonement. Vernal, Utah, 11 December 1981. Funk, Nancy. Newspaperwoman. Salt Lake City, Utah, 13 December 1981. Gilmour, Sandy. Reporter, KUTV-2. Houston, Texas, 24 March, 1981. Grabner, Hilda. Lark resident. 23 March 1981. Sandy, Utah, 11 and Howland, Emma Jean. Lark resident. 3 December 1981. West Jordan, Utah, Kefauver, Ken. Director Community Affairs, Kennecott Copper Corporation, Utah Division. Salt Lake City, 20 March 1980. Lodmell, Dick. Lead organizer, Western Action Training Institute. Salt Lake City, 4 April 1981. Lopp, Dan. Lead organizer, Western Action Training Institute. Salt Lake City, 21 March 1981. 225 Male, Rich. Director, Community Resources, Inc. ver). Salt Lake City, 13 June 1980. I Mayne, Ed. President, Utah AFL-CIO. 19 March 1981. Miller, Leonard. Lark resident. ember 1981. (Den­ Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, 8 Dec­ Ortiz, Betty. South County Community Action Program worker. Salt Lake City, 4 April 1981. Petersen, Gene. Copper Corporation Lark Representative, Kennecott. Salt Lake City, 16 December 1981. Rubright, Richard. Lark resident. 2 December 1981. Shaw, Manford A. 1982. Attorney. Salt Lake City, 23 March Thomas, Myrtle. Lark resident. ruary 1981. Trujillo, Bernie and Elaine. Utah, 16 March 1981. Salt Lake City, Midvale, Utah, 2 Feb­ Lark residents. Vernon, Tuttle, Rich. Community organizer, Western Action Training Institute. Salt Lake City, 2 0 March 198 0 and 21 March 1981. Warner, Earle. Program Developer, Western Action Training Institute. Salt Lake City, 10 Septem­ ber 1982. Woody, Bob. Business Editor, Salt Lake Tribune. Lake City, 25 March 19 81. Salt Tape Recordings* Lark residents' group strategy meeting, Lark, Utah, 24 February 1978. Lark elected town committee meeting, Lark, Utah, 30 March 1978. *Recordings made by Western Action Training Institute, Salt Lake City, copies in author's possession. 226 Lark residents' group New York delegation strategy meeting, New York City, 2 May 1978. Lark residents' group New York delegation strategy session, New York City, 3 May 1978. Lark residents' group New York delegation negotiating meeting with Kennecott Copper Corporation, New York City, 3 May 1978. Lark residents' group strategy meeting, Lark, Utah, 7 May 1978. Lark elected town committee meeting with Kennecott Copper, Lark, Utah, 8 May 1978. Video Tape Recordings KUTV-2, Salt Lake City, news programs as listed. copy in author's possession. Audio News at Six 0'1clock, 1 May 1978. News at Ten O ’ 'clock, 1 May 1978. News at Six O'1clock, 2 May 1978. News at Ten O'[clock, 2 May 1978. News at Six O' clock, 4 May 1978. News at Six O'!clock, 5 May 1978. News at Ten O' clock, 7 May 1978. News at Six O''clock, 8 May 1978. News at Ten O' clock, 8 May 1978. Unpublished Materials Grabner, Hilda. Address to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Consultation, "Resource Development in the Intermountain West: Its Impact on Women and Minorities," 2 November 1978, Denver, Colorado. 227 Warner, Earle. "A Brief Overview of Western Action's Grassroots Organizing Philosophy and Approach," Staff paper, Western Action Training Institute, Salt Lake City, Utah 1979. Warner, Earle. "The Rocky Mountain West," Staff paper, Western Action Training Institute, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1980. Corre spondence Gale, Don, Public Affairs Director KSL AM-TV, Salt Lake City. Letter to Emma Jean Howland, Lark elected committee chairman, 12 June 1978. Grabner, Hilda, resident, Lark, Utah. Letters received May to June 1978 during Lark story. Selected copies in author's possession. Howland, Emma Jean, Lark elected committee chairman, Lark, Utah. Letter to Don Gale, Public Affairs Director, KSL AM-TV, Salt Lake City, 16 June 1978. Citizen Action Guides and Resource Listings - ■ Booth, Heather, revised by Steve Max, Direct Action Organizing; I "Strategy Planning," II "Preparing for Action," III "Choosing A Tactic," Chicago, Midwest Academy, 1977. McDowell, Donna, The New Older Citizens Guide: Advocacy and Action, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare, 1977. "Technical Assistance Provided in the Area of Community Organizing," Washington, D.C., Campaign for Human Development, 198 2.