Christie Porter has worked as a journalist for nearly a decade, writing about everything under the sun, but she really loves writing about nerdy things and the weird stuff. She recently published her first comic book short this year.
Sadie Joy Muhlestein begins with raw clay and shapes it into mugs, teapots or vessels. While the clay dries, she creates the designs and then applies the underglaze. “This is my favorite step,” she says. “I spend the most time painting with loving intention the details of my designs.” She describes the process as alchemy of all the elements: the clay is earth, water manipulates the form of the clay, air commits the shape and fire transmutes and strengthens the piece. “Heart through art is the magical element that takes a mundane item and makes it joyful.” A lifelong artist, Sadie set up a studio space and started creating pottery in Spring 2022, and now she sells her pieces at local markets like Utah Art Market, JKR gallery and the Salt & Honey shop and on Instagram @wildjoypotteryandart.
Find Joy in Your Own Pottery
Whether you’re looking to pick up a new hobby, hone existing skills or just get your hands dirty with clay, there are plenty of pottery workshops in Utah. The following classes welcome all skill levels so you can tap into the creative joy within.
Art Haus
This Salt Lake studio offers adult and children’s classes seven days a week. Their intro to wheel-thrown pottery course is perfect for newbies to the craft. Throughout four classes their skilled teachers will guide students in forming mugs and bowls, and teach basic skills like carving and glazing.
Learn more about Art Haus’ offerings on their website.
The Kreative Kiln
Owned and operated by a husband and wife duo, The Kreative Kiln is an open studio located in Pleasant Grove. Their pottery wheel throwing experience is a fun alternative for birthday parties, date night, or a solo creative challenge! Interested artists can also purchase memberships to use the studio’s tools, supplies and space. Find more info here.
Workshop SLC
Workshop SLC is a collective of artists, both professional and hobbyists alike. The studio recently introduce pottery classes ranging from foundational to intermediate. Learn from staff through demonstration, lecture and one-on-one instruction to throw clay, shape ceramics and apply unique decorating techniques. The studio also offers one-day workshops with all supplies included. Learn more!
On a rainy afternoon in Salt Lake City, most people aren’t thinking about the state of Utah’s court system, the role judges play in that system or how diversity on a bench improves the decision-making process. No, most people are probably thinking about how the rain is going to turn I-15 into a parking lot during the afternoon commute. But, in an intimate dining room in downtown Salt Lake City, dozens gathered to hear the three women currently sitting on the Utah Supreme Court share their thoughts on the former.
Judge Gregory Orme, who sits on the Utah Court of Appeals, moderated the event held at the Alta Club on Tuesday, which hosts regular “City Club Encounters” as an opportunity for its members to hear from not just the Justices, but local leaders like Utah Governor Spencer Cox and Mayor Erin Mendenhall. Judge Orme, who is also a club member, kicked off the Justices’ presentation with some context: there have been only 50 sitting justices in the history of the Utah Supreme Court; of those 50, five have been women; of those five women, “three are in this room.”
Diversity on the bench
It follows that one of the first questions asked of Justice Paige Petersen, Justice Diana Hagen and Justice Jill Pohlman was about diversity on the bench—does making a diverse bench (gender, race, background, etc.) enrich the courts’ decision making process?
“Yes,” says Justice Hagen without hesitation. “The questions you ask and the way you approach argument and analysis…have a lot to do with what your background is.” And, it stands to reason, if all of the judges on a bench have the same background, the questions will be much the same and the less “push back” and fewer “holes” can be poked in one another’s arguments and analysis. Even having a diversity of experience is helpful, if one member of the bench has a civil law background and another a criminal law background, for instance. “The more complex a legal issue, the more minds you want to bring to bear on the issue,” says Justice Hagen.
That said, Justice Hagen recognized that the Utah Bar is not terribly diverse. The population of Utah’s law schools is, but many of those studying the law are not staying and practicing it in Utah. It’s something, she says, the Bar is trying to change—to let those law students know that there is a place for them in Utah to practice.
Partisan politics in the courts
All three justices are adamant about what the role of judges is and what it is not. And, it is not to play partisan politics—something that might be hard to swallow, given the divisive political climate and actions and words of judges, either elected or appointed, across the nation. In the Justices’ confirmation hearings in the Utah State Senate, they say they had to remind legislators (even the ones who were attorneys) that “we are not political idealogues.”
Justice Pohlman remembers one legislator became particularly frustrated when “I wouldn’t tell him what I thought on a certain political matter.” She says, “I have views…but my personal views don’t matter. It was very hard for him to accept that I take my oath seriously.”
Justice Petersen explains, “We don’t always like the results of cases. But we are supposed to apply the law fairly…and consistently. We have to always apply the law the same.”
But, according to the Utah Courts, a new law passed during the last legislative session and signed by the governor, could put the courts’ fairness—and lack of political partisanship—at risk. Part of what makes Utah’s court system great, the Justices explain, is its merit-based judicial selection process. It works like this: Judges apply for openings on a bench, the judicial nominating commission in that judicial district conducts interviews and makes five–seven (depending on the court) recommendations to the Governor, the Governor nominates who they think is best for the job and the Utah State Senate confirms the nomination.
Up until recently (before the new law) the requirements for a judicial nominating commission were:
Each commissioner must be a U.S. citizen, a resident of Utah and a resident of the judicial district it is representing.
Commissioners may not be a member of the Legislature.
No more than four commissioners may be from the same political party.
The Governor must appoint two commissioners from a list of nominees provided by the Utah State Bar. However, the Governor may not appoint more than four persons who are members of the Utah State Bar.
Before the new law, the Judicial Council also chose an eighth member of the commission to give feedback or guidance but not vote on recommendations. Those requirements serve as “guardrails” to prevent partisan judges and politics in the courtroom that we might see in other states on the news—for many, the recent judicial election in Michigan might come to mind. (“If I had to be elected as a judge, I never would have been a judge,” says Justice Pohlman.)
Now, with the new law in place, those requirements for judicial nominating commissions—those “guardrails”—are gone. The Utah Bar also opposed the bill, saying it consolidates “all power to appoint nominating commissions in the Governor” and calling it “in contravention of established best practices.”
Still, the fact remains that Utah’s Constitution states, “Selection of judges shall be based solely upon consideration of fitness for office without regard to any partisan political consideration.” And that gives the Justices some hope.
“In Utah, we try to keep our judiciary out of politics,” says Justice Petersen. “I’m hopeful that they’ll continue to make the selection of judges based on merit.”
An ethical judiciary
Another big news headline involving the judiciary—in this case, the nation’s highest court—directed conversation on Tuesday. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is under scrutiny for possibly breaking the law when he did not disclose high-value gifts—including yearly luxury trips on a private jet and superyacht and purchasing a home for his mother-in-law—from GOP mega-donor Harlan Crow.
Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, the justices on the Utah Supreme Court have a judicial code of ethics to which they adhere. “Accidentally violating one of those rules is the stuff of nightmares,” says Justice Petersen. While the code allows for the acceptance of gifts in some circumstances, “We all err on the side of not getting close to the line,” says Petersen.
Meet the Justices of the Utah Supreme Court
Utah Supreme Court Justice Paige Petersen
Justice Paige Petersen
Justice Paige Petersen was appointed to the Utah Supreme court in December 2017 by Governor Gary Herbert. Before joining the Supreme Court, she was a district court judge in the Third Judicial District, which serves Salt Lake, Summit, and Tooele counties. Justice Petersen graduated summa cum laude from the University of Utah in 1995, after first obtaining an associate’s degree from the College of Eastern Utah in Price. She received her law degree from Yale Law School in 1999. Petersen then prosecuted war crimes at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague, Netherlands, where she was a member of the trial team responsible for successfully prosecuting the former Serbian Chief of Police for ethnic cleansing and mass murder in Kosovo. She then returned to Utah and joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Salt Lake City, where she prosecuted violent crimes for three years before taking the bench.
Justice Petersen says of her time as a court judge, “I had no idea how hard it was to be a judge before that.” (That came after her time prosecuting on a war crime tribunal at The Hague.) She says her journey to the bench can be tracked through her hairstyle, which had to be “toned down” from the big ‘80s hair she rocked in rural Price, Utah when she went to the U of U and yet again at Yale Law School.
Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen
Justice Diana Hagen
Justice Diana Hagen was appointed to the Utah Supreme Court in March 2022 by Governor Spencer J. Cox. Prior to her appointment, Justice Hagen served on the Utah Court of Appeals for nearly five years. She received her law degree Order of the Coif from the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law in 1998, where she was a member of the National Moot Court Team and the Utah Law review editorial board. She has been recognized with a Utah Philanthropy Day Heart & Hands Award in 2014 for her volunteer work with Girl Scouts of Utah, was named the S.J. Quinney College of Laws 2015 Alumna of the Year, and received the FBA Utah Chapters Distinguished Service Award in 2017. Justice Hagen currently chairs the Judicial Branch Education Committee and serves as the appellate judge designee for the Utah Sentencing Commission.
Justice Hagen says she “applied for the appellate court eight times” before she got the job. Before that, she was recommended for a job in the U.S. Attorney’s Office because “you can write, and I know you can argue.”
Utah Supreme Court Justice Jill M. Pohlman
Justice Jill Pohlman
Justice Jill M. Pohlman was appointed to the Utah Supreme Court in June 2022 by Governor Spencer J. Cox. At the time, she was serving as Associate Presiding Judge on the Utah Court of Appeals. Judge Pohlman graduated Magna Cum Laude from the University of Utah in 1993 and received her Juris Doctorate from the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah in 1996, where she served on the Utah Law Review and graduated Order of the Coif. Justice Pohlman currently sits on the Judicial Councils Committee on Judicial Outreach and has previously served on several committees, including the Utah Supreme Courts Advisory Committee on the Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Utah Supreme Courts Ethics and Discipline Committee, and the Utah Supreme Court’s Diversion Committee.
Justice Pohlman says, by 4th grade “I knew I was going to be a lawyer, and I knew I was going to be a judge.” By 6th grade, she was making the other kids in her class “play The People’s Court during recess.”
On Monday, Salt Lake City Mayor Mendenhall showed off two huge debris basins to make a point about the city’s flood preparedness. From the basins, long-arm tractors can haul out fallen trees, large boulders and other debris to clear obstructed waterways and mitigate flooding. They were installed after the great Salt Lake City flood of 1983, when Utah’s snowfall looked much like it does now. It goes to show, the Mayor says, that without a doubt Salt Lake City is much better prepared for this year’s record snowfall than it was in 1983. The flood risk extends further than Salt Lake County, of course—the Governor declared April as “Flood Safety Month” to encourage all Utahns to be prepared for flooding and other natural disasters—but why is Utah flooding on the top of mind?
Utah flooding causes
To start, we’ve had record snowfall. By late March, the 2022–23 winter season was breaking records on a few levels. Brighton crossed over the 700-inch mark of annual snowfall for the season—a “once in a decade event.” According to Ski Utah, this is the earliest in the season that this has occurred since Utah began recording snowfall in 1943. By April, Alta Ski Area hit the 800-inch inch mark. As of Monday, Alta’s year-to-date snowfall was 877 inches.
This winter is breaking records for snowpack as well. The previous record of 26 inches of snow water equivalent (SWE)—which estimates the amount of water it would be if it melted—was set in 1983. At last check, we are sitting at 29.6 inches, according to the Utah Division of Water Resources.
— SLC Department of Public Utilities (@SLCPU) April 5, 2023
Utah gets approximately 95% of our water from snowpack. Reservoirs store the water from snowpack and runoff to get us through dry years. And we have had a lot of dry years. The American West is experiencing the worst drought in 1,200 years. That extended drought has depleted reservoirs and, along with human water usage, lowered the Great Salt Lake’s water to precariously low levels. While the record-breaking amounts of snow will help recharge reservoirs and restore the Great Salt Lake, it will take multiple years of above-average snowpack and precipitation to reverse the impact of drought.
One thing that won’t take much time at all, after all of this snow, is flooding from the subsequent spring runoff. Temperatures reached 70 degrees in Salt Lake County on Monday, with temperatures of 10 degrees higher than the seasonal average in the forecast for much of Utah, according to the Salt Lake City National Weather Service. Utah flooding happens when conditions (like unseasonably high temperatures) lead to rapid snow melt and rivers, streams and other water channels become overwhelmed.
Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall and other leaders highlighted on Monday, April 10, 2023, the City’s substantial investments in drainage infrastructure designed to prevent and mitigate flooding risks from spring runoff. (courtesy Salt Lake City Mayor’s Office via Twitter @slcmayor)
Infrastructure improvements since 1983
During the 1983 spring runoff, the storm drain carrying City Creek flows in North Temple became clogged with debris that extended four city blocks. Since then, there’s been the addition of debris basins along City Creek so crews can remove debris before it becomes a problem.
“We’ve made significant infrastructure investments since the floods of 1983 that make us more prepared this time around. We know this is a big concern for our residents and we’re taking it seriously in our planning and preparation,” Mayor Mendenhall says. “From a robust storm water system, to debris basins and the addition of Little Dell reservoir, Salt Lake City and our flood control partners, including Salt Lake County, have been preparing for decades to ensure the best possible outcomes for our residents in high snowpack years.”
Other system improvements include grate improvements in Memory Grove to prevent potential backups, piped drainage system improvements to allow for better conveyance of spring runoff and Little Dell Reservoir (constructed between 1987 and 1993) as a flood control and water storage facility.
Flood preparedness
Flood zone risk mapping
While we can’t know with 100% certainty when and where flooding will occur, FEMA maps areas to show their potential risk for flooding. You can go to the FEMA Flood Map Service Center and enter your address to show the possible risk of flooding in your area.
Utah Division of Emergency Management in the process of distributing a 1.5 million sandbags to counties around the state. (courtesy Utah Division of Emergency Management via Twitter @UtahEmergency)
Sandbags
Salt Lake County representatives say they have been receiving a lot of questions about where to get sandbags. Residents can fill and pick up free sandbags at locations listed on their website: Salt Lake County sandbag locations. The county says that some locations will be checking IDs to verify residency.
Utah flooding risk mitigation
There are a lot of things residents can do to prepare their homes and mitigate flooding and flood damage. However, many of those things take time to build, retrofit or install. As far as what you can do now to prepare:
Clear gutters and drains of any blockages or debris and keep debris away from steams.
Sign-up for, if necessary, and keep up-to-date on disaster warnings, local emergency alerts and information. Most communities have an emergency alert system (through cell phone, email or landline) that you can opt into, such as Salt Lake City Emergency Management. FEMA’s Wireless Emergency Alerts are location-based and do not require a subscription.
Make a plan for your household, including your pets, so that you and your family know what to do, where to go, and what you will need to protect yourselves from flooding.
Learn and practice evacuation routes, shelter plans and flash flood response.
Gather supplies, including non-perishable foods, cleaning supplies and water for several days, in case you must leave immediately or if services are cut off in your area.
If you’re a Utah State employee, Governor Cox announced that he approved eight hours of administrative leave for all Utah State employees to assist with flood mitigation.
In general, keep clear of spring runoff. Many county parks and trails are designed to be detention basins, so don’t be alarmed if you see more water than usual. Runoff can move suddenly so don’t drive or wade through it and keep kids and pets out of the water.
Salt Lake County Emergency Management has a form that allows people to register to volunteer. SLCoEM uses the list of registrants to connect volunteers with events where the help is needed. When an event arises, they will email information to the volunteers who most closely meet the need.
Washington County Search and Rescue on Johnson Canyon Trail after a flash flood. (courtesy Washington County SAR via Facebook @WCSOSARUT)
Southern Utah Flooding
It bears mentioning that some of our favorite outdoor recreational spots have a higher risk for flash flooding during spring runoff. Already, in Kane County, at Buckskin Gulch, flash flooding killed two hikers in the narrow canyon back in March. What draws hikers to Buckskin Gulch—winding through 16 miles through one of the longest slot canyons in the world—is also what makes it particularly dangerous during a flash flood.
A few days later, Washington County Search and Rescue rescued six people, including three children, from Johnson Canyon Trail who had become stranded on the far side of a wash after a flash flood turned that wash into a full-blown raging river.
On the bright side, the the spring runoff has given life to the Dirty Devil for river runners and returned waterfalls (and the crowds) to Gunlock State Park.
In 2018, the murder of a student-athlete at the University of Utah dominated the news, locally and nationally. As more of the circumstances surrounding her death came to light—her unheeded pleas for help, police misconduct, the final phone call with her parents—the more Lauren McCluskey’s death gripped our attention. The question that dominated minds and headlines: how could this happen? Now a new, upcoming documentary could provide some more answers. The ESPN investigative documentary, LISTEN, will examine the events that led to Lauren McCluskey’s death, the institutional failures and her parents’ quest for answers.
Lauren McCluskey’s murder by Melvin Rowland continues to influence policy and discussions about campus safety (After her death, her parents established the Lauren McCluskey Foundation in part to support campus safety.) because, as documented in LISTEN, “the people and the institutions responsible for protecting her failed at every turn,” according to an ESPN press release.
The trailer for LISTEN, a new ESPN investigative documentary on Lauren McCluskey
The ESPN documentary will take a look at the allegations of University of Utah Police misconduct, ensuing state legislation, the lawsuit against the University of Utah that resulted in a $13.5 million settlement for the McCluskey family, and continual institutional issues.
The documentary is set to run 90 minutes and includes new reporting by ESPN journalists T.J. Quinn and Nicole Noren, revelations and interviews, as well as “never-before-seen surveillance video, police and dispatch recordings, previously unreleased video and audio interviews from the homicide investigation and phone recordings.” Quinn and Noren are also expected to give insight into their ongoing battles to obtain records from the University of Utah. ESPN is billing LISTEN as “part true crime and part accountability journalism.”
Lauren McCluskey’s parents appear in LISTEN, an ESPN documentary about their daughter’s death. (Courtesy ESPN)
In addition to interviews with Lauren’s parents, Jill and Matt McCluskey, the documentary features numerous people connected to the case speaking publicly about it for the first time, including:
Sean Reyes—Utah Attorney General
Miguel Deras—former campus police officer
Paul Amann–Former Utah Asst. Attorney General, who prosecuted Rowland for two sex crimes
Megan Thomson—Rowland’s parole agent
A woman who dated Rowland
Other interviews in the documentary include:
Two of Lauren McCluskey’s closest friends
Courtney Tanner–Salt Lake Tribune lead reporter on the story
Todd Reed–former KTVX/ABC4 (Salt Lake City) news director
Diamond Jackson–Lauren McCluskey’s university housing adviser
LISTEN debuts Tuesday, March 28, 7 p.m. ET on ESPN+ and ESPN+ on Hulu. A special two-hour episode of 20/20 “Running Out of Time,” based on ESPN’s Investigation and anchored by David Muir., airs Friday, March 31, at 9 p.m ET on ABC. In addition to the documentary, ESPN says Lauren McCluskey’s story will be explored in an Outside the Lines segment in a future noon ET edition of SportsCenter and in a future episode of the ESPN Daily Podcast.
On Thursday, Southern Utah University announced that apostle of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Jeffrey R. Holland would be the keynote speaker of the university’s upcoming commencement ceremony. The member of LDS leadership made headlines in 2021 for comments he made concerning LGBTQ+ students in a speech at BYU. Within hours, the university released a follow-up statement on social media to address a torrent criticism of the choice, and a LGBTQ+ SUU student club has started a Change.org petition to remove Holland as the SUU commencement keynote speaker. As of Friday morning, that petition has about 5,000 signatures.
The SUU Pride and Equality Club (SUU PAEC) released a statement Friday morning, saying:
“We feel that the actions made by the selecting committee were inadequate in representing the student body. Choosing Jeffrey R. Holland to speak at commencement actively endorses efforts to marginalize the LGBTQ+ community. We feel that allowing him the opportunity to speak at commencement would not be conducive to SUU’s mission statement of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Graduating students should be allowed to celebrate their achievements and remain comfortable in the spaces allocated to them. Due to these beliefs we are calling for the removal of Jeffery R. Holland as the commencement speaker.”
Southern Utah University responded with the following statement Friday afternoon:
“Southern Utah University acknowledges the feelings of fear, anger and disappointment this announcement has caused to some of our campus community. The University is listening and committed to building systems and practices that help us encompass our different identities through respect and empathy. We encourage dialogue at every level and are reviewing the feedback that has been shared.”
The controversy of Holland as a choice as speaker at SUU stems from a speech Holland gave in 2021 at Brigham Young University in which he rebuked the 2019 political science valedictorian, Matt Easton, for coming out publicly as gay in his speech. (BYU’s Social Science Department approved the speech in its entirety beforehand.) Holland lamented, “If a student commandeers a graduation podium intended to represent everyone getting diplomas in order to announce his personal sexual orientation, what might another speaker feel free to announce the next year until eventually, anything goes?” He also quoted a speech from fellow LDS apostle Dallin H. Oaks to encourage members of BYU’s faculty to show more “musket fire” when defending the LDS faith’s current views on sexuality and marriage.
In the speaker announcement, SUU president Mindy Benson says, “Elder Holland’s Southern Utah roots and dedication to education and learning are timely as we wrap up our 125th anniversary year. His address will offer inspiration to our graduates to embrace lifelong learning and give back to their communities as they leave SUU and continue to build their lives.”
Critics of SUU’s decision to bring Holland in as a keynote speaker suggested the choice was at odds with SUU’s mission. The university’s Center for Diversity and Inclusion mission states it is “committed to advocating for our lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA+) students, staff, and community members. We believe in creating an environment where sexual and gender diversity is respected and celebrated. As a Center, we resist any actions contrary to the health and success of our LGBTQIA+ communities.”
The announcement has garnered hundreds of comments on social media. In response, the official SUU instagram commented: “Elder Jeffrey R. Holland was invited to speak at commencement because of his Southern Utah roots and his experience in leadership and dedication to higher education. We have had many religious representatives address our graduating classes in the past, including Reverend France Davis and Rabbi Shmuley Boteach. We understand that there are graduating students from a variety of backgrounds and identities, and expect that Holland’s address will connect and inspire attendees to be life-long learners, despite religious or other differences among the audience.”
On her resumé, current SUU president Mindy Benson lists that she “promoted LGBTQIA+Allies through events, discussion and new initiatives,” including helping students found the first Pride Club and Gender Blender at SUU. Now, one of the university’s LGBTQ+ clubs is protesting the university’s choice of keynote speaker under her leadership.
The SUU Pride and Equality Club’s (SUU PAEC) stated mission is “to provide education and awareness on Queer issues, encourage positive change within our community, and provide service within our organization, on campus, and throughout the community.” The SUU PAEC linked the Change.org petition, started by club president Garn Hughes, on their instagram following the keynote speaker announcement.
Southern Utah University’s 2023 Commencement ceremony is scheduled for Friday, April 28, 2023.
Not every murder or kidnapping leads to a societal reckoning of some kind. Although, perhaps they should. In a world obsessed with the gritty details, sensationalism, anxiety and catharsis of true crime, we often overlook the human impact and the personal and societal trauma that remain long after the case is closed. But some events have a way of cutting through barriers of self-protection and shining a spotlight on the darkness in our world and in ourselves. These are crimes that shifted our perceptions and forced us to reevaluate our communities and institutions. In some cases, the event woke us up from a stupor in which we believed all was fine in the world and forced us to face a harsher reality. In other cases, survivors and families of victims defied the odds and made commitments to do their best to ensure no one else would have to endure what they had. These are five cases of true crime in Utah after which we would never be the same again.
The Last Lynching in the American West
Offense: Homicide, Date: 1866, 1833, 1925, Case File: No. 2563
Synopsis
The state of Utah and its predominant faith have a past entrenched in racism, perhaps more so than most residents realize. As a result, students in Utah schools probably didn’t learn about the three Black men lynched in Utah, but now there are people raising awareness of their deaths to try to start the process of understanding and addressing that racist past, and how it permeates our society still, so we can begin healing.
in 2022, Salt Lake County Community Coalition hosted a soil gathering ceremony at the sites where Thomas Coleman and William Harvey. Photo credit Rachel Linquist.
Narrative
In 1866, a group of boys playing on Arsenal Hill (what is now Utah’s Capitol Hill) discovered the body of Thomas Coleman. Coleman was a Black man, formerly enslaved, and a Mormon. He worked for Brigham Young at the Salt Lake House hotel in downtown Salt Lake City after arriving in 1848, one year after the Latter-Day Saints settled the Salt Lake Valley and the year Utah became a U.S. territory. Coleman was brutally beaten with a rock and stabbed with his own knife, according to the coroner. A sign was left on his body, reading, “Notice to all N******. Take warning. Leave white women alone.” Leaders of the Latter-day Saints at the time were opposed to interracial marriage and made it illegal in the territory in 1852. Such public, violent acts were used to enforce racial segregation. To this day, it remains a mystery as to who killed Coleman.
In 1883, a mob of white Utahns, as many as 2,000 people, stormed the Salt Lake City jail, took a Black man named William H. Harvey and publicly hanged him. Harvey was jailed, accused of shooting and killing the city’s police chief, but the white mob lynched him before he went to trial. Police were complicit in the lynching and, despite thousands of participants and spectators, no one was charged for lynching Harvey.
To further prove the point that Black people were not welcome in Utah, in 1925, residents of Price (labeled a “sundown town” where the KKK had a strong presence) lynched Robert Marshall. He was a coal miner also accused of shooting a sheriff. Before Marshall made it to trial, the townspeople took him and hanged him twice. In the end, no one was held accountable for the public lynching because none of the hundreds of townspeople who witnessed it would give testimony. The violent ordeal has come to be known as the last lynching of a Black man in the American West.
In an effort to memorialize these men, in June 2022, the Salt Lake County Community Coalition hosted a soil gathering ceremony at the sites where Thomas Coleman and William Harvey were killed. The two jars of soil now reside with the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Ala., where they are on display at the National Memorial for Peace and Justice with soil collected from the sites of lynchings across the country. Two jars remain in Utah to serve as a local memorial.
The Mark Hoffman Case
Offense: Untold Damage to History, Date: 10-15-1985, Case File: No. 35637
Mark Hofmann on Trial. Photo courtesy of Special Collections, J. Willard Marriot Library, University of Utah.
Synopsis
Mark Hofmann fooled a nationwide community of scholars, investigators and collectors with his forgeries and engineered the bombings that killed two people. Hofmann’s notorious deeds will always be inextricably entwined with the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but the impact of his machinations spread far outside of Utah and the church.
Narrative
On Oct. 15, 1985, a bomb exploded in the Judge Building in downtown Salt Lake City. The explosion killed businessman Steven Christensen. Hours later, another bomb exploded in the Salt Lake City suburbs, killing Kathy Sheets in the blast meant for her husband, Gary. The bombs had been planted by Mark Hofmann to prevent the exposure of his other crimes—prolific forgery of historic documents including Hofmann’s forgery of the infamous Salamander Letter. The letter challenged LDS beliefs by detailing an alternate account in which it was a white salamander, and not an angel, that led church founder Joseph Smith to the gold plates, from which he translated the Book of Mormon.
Former LDS Church Historian and author of Victims: The LDS Church and the Mark Hofmann Case Richard Turley says, to prevent from being fooled again, the church archives launched new projects and implemented new policies and technology. Hofmann’s forgeries, however, were not limited to the interests of the LDS Church and Utahns. Turley says his book also helped one person discover that an Emily Dickenson piece, which they were about to acquire, was actually a Hofmann fake. But there is no telling how many uncovered Hofmann forgeries are still out there, doing untold damage not just to church history and the Utah historical record, but American and world history as well.
A Voice for Survivors
Description: Elizabeth Smart becomes an advocate, Date: 06-05-2002, Case File: No. 56879
Elizabeth Smart. Photo by Shutterstock
Synopsis
The abduction of Elizabeth Smart made her a household name across the country. Twenty years after her rescue, Smart has used the subsequent platform to become an advocate for survivors of sexual abuse and to change the way victims are treated.
Narrative
On June 5, 2002, Brian David Mitchell kidnapped 14-year-old Elizabeth Smart from her family’s Salt Lake City home and held her captive for nine months. On March 12, 2003, Smart was rescued and reunited with her family. It was years later before Smart decided to return to the national spotlight.
At a panel at John Hopkins University in 2013, Smart said one of the factors that deterred her from escaping captivity was that she felt worthless after being raped. This was in part due to the lessons she had received about sexual purity, which compared non-virgins to “a chewed piece of gum.” The story captured the ways our culture undermines and blames victims.
Motivated by the stories of other sexual assault victims who said no one had believed them or taken them seriously, Smart started the Elizabeth Smart Foundation to support survivors. Over the years, the efforts have evolved, including initiatives like the “We Believe You” campaign, which provides financial grants for survivors of abuse and assault. Smart acknowledges that having people believe in her and a strong support system helped her create a life after her ordeal, and “We Believe You” is meant to confront the stigma and disbelief surrounding sexual violence so other survivors can have the same chance.
A Luminary’s Legacy Cut Short
Offense: Arson, Homicide, Date: 05-22-2016, Case File: No. 786950
John Williams. Photo by Adam Finkle.
Synopsis
Few homicides in recent times touched the citizens of Salt Lake City quite as much as John Williams’ did. The City remembers Williams as a restaurateur, LGBTQ advocate, renovator and historic preservationist. His friends knew him as a generous host, especially at his famous Christmas parties. His murder at the hands of his ex-partner cut short a life that would have already an outsized legacy and sparked a conversation about how this could happen, despite Williams’ attempts to seek help from the law.
Narrative
On May 22, 2016, John Williams (72) was at home in his Capitol Hill mansion when his estranged husband, Craig Crawford (now 54), set fire to the house. Unable to escape, Williams suffocated in his smoke-filled bedroom.
Crawford, an admitted addict, delusional and volatile, had returned only recently to Williams’ life and home after Crawford was deported from Canada. Within months, Williams had written Crawford out of his will, drafted eviction papers, and filed for divorce and for a protective order against Crawford. The protective order claimed Crawford was becoming a danger to those around him. A second court filing made it clear that Williams had little faith in the court’s ability to help. The court denied the request. Less than three weeks later, Crawford killed Williams by setting fire to the home.
The tragic event started a discussion about how State law addresses domestic violence, the effectiveness of protective orders and the barriers to getting help, particularly for those within the LGBTQ+ community. Nearly seven years later, the State of Utah is still reckoning with its troubling domestic violence statistics, with multiple bills proposed during the 2023 Utah Legislative Session that could fund and coordinate efforts and victims’ services statewide.
One of Williams’ final acts of generosity was funding the Encircle organization, which endeavors to offer a safe haven and resources for LGBTQ+ youth and their families. His name now resides on a new Salt Lake City mansion, hosting events for the LGBTQ+ community, the John Williams Encircle Home.
Offense: Homicide, Date: 10-22-2018, Case File: No. 983729
Synopsis
Lauren McCluskey. Photo courtesy of Lauren McCluskey Family.
Before she was killed on the campus of the University of Utah, student-athlete Lauren McCluskey had tried to warn campus police about the danger she faced. The investigation into her eventual murder revealed the failures of both the authorities and the university to respond to those threats. In the years that followed, improving campus safety became a mission for the McCluskey family and a stated priority for the university, but a recent student murder exposed that there is still more work to be done.
Narrative
On the evening of Oct. 22, 2018, Lauren McCluskey (21) was found dead in the parking lot next to her University of Utah campus dormitory. She had been shot seven times by her ex-boyfriend Melvin Rowland. Rowland had waited for Lauren in her resident hall for several hours. She was on the phone with her mother when Rowland dragged her across the parking lot. Matt McCluskey, Lauren’s father, alerted campus security that his daughter was in danger. It was too late then, but, prior to the murder, Lauren had gone to law enforcement, fearing for her life.
There were multiple instances her murder could have been prevented. According to her mother Jill McCluskey, “The officers never checked Lauren’s killer’s offender status. After the police took her statement, they could have easily found out that Rowland was on parole and put him in jail right then. I just wish a responsible adult would have listened and believed.”
On the first anniversary of her murder, a student organization called UnsafeU led a walk-out to protest how the university handled the case. The 2020-21 academic year started with another UnsafeU protest. Her family started the Lauren McCluskey Foundation to honor Lauren and provide resources to “change the cultures that respond poorly to dating violence and stalking on campuses.”
While the university had promised to improve training and communication between housing staff and campus police after Lauren’s death, a 2022 state audit uncovered that those same issues persisted, and they could have contributed to another student’s murder. Before she was killed earlier that same year, U. student Zhifan Dong warned the university’s housing department about her ex-boyfriend, who had assaulted her and lived in the same dorm. The University of Utah acknowledged mishandling the case and that the employee training on recognizing and reporting domestic violence, instituted after Lauren’s death, was not enough.
A bank has failed. Scratch that. Two banks have failed (RIP Signature Bank, too, but no one seems to care as much about that). The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) represents the second largest bank failure in U.S. history. As anxiety over the banking system spread over the weekend, some people rushed to their regional banks to pull out their cash while others sat at home on Twitter and almost wished they had cash to pull out. Federal and State officials took phone calls late into the night, scrambling for solutions, while reassuring their friends in the tech and banking industries that they would not let this “contagion” spread to their businesses (or their own investment firms).
“It was a very intense 48-plus hours for everyone who was involved,” says Utah Governor Spencer Cox at a Silicon Slopes town hall on Monday. “Especially those whose deposits were at risk.” Earlier Cox had tweeted, “We recognize the serious impact this [SVB collapse] has on many Utah firms with significant assets at risk. We will push regulators and federal partners to work quickly for stability, certainty and solutions.”
If it was anything like the last time (2008 was not so long ago for us millennials), we all knew what to expect: golden parachutes for executives, government bailouts for the banks “too big to fail,” and a lot of little people left to suffer and fight over scraps in the fallout. But it was different this time. The “contagion” did not spread, as far as we can tell. At least, that’s what all of our elected officials keep saying.
Silicon Valley Bank’s shareholders and executives lose it all, as they should. Depositors in good faith, however, should recover and have access to their deposits in order to meet their payrolls, pay their suppliers, and to prevent contagion.
“The people at Silicon Slopes and across our state had a big impact on the Fed and the FDIC and the administration making the right decision,” says Utah Senator Mitt Romney at the Silicon Slopes town hall. That “right decision” is the Federal Government covering all of the money depositors had in Silicon Valley Bank, not just the FDIC-insured amount of up-to $250,000.
According to some market commentators, if you have that amount deposited with a single bank, then maybe you should suffer the consequences? As The Kobeissi Letter explains, “If you have $1 million at 1 bank, then only $250,000 of it is insured by the FDIC. If you have $250,000 at 4 banks, then $1 million of it is insured by the FDIC. This is the logic that runs the current banking system. We need a reform or this systemic collapse will continue.”
Regardless, why did Federal and Utah State politicians want to bend the rules for the depositors of this bank in particular? To keep this “contagion” from spreading. “Both the Federal Reserve and the FDIC are very anxious and willing to take the steps necessary to make sure people realize that their deposits in a federally regulated bank are not going to get lost and are going to be fully covered,” says Romney.
Confidence here is key. A lack of confidence in their bank means depositors all at once rush to pull their money out of a bank, like SVB—to the tune of $42 billion in a matter of hours— “which no bank could withstand,” according to former Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Board, Randal Quarles. “It’s not indicative of a general systemic problem within the banking industry.” What confidence.
However, it looks like some clients and markets do not share that confidence at the moment. U.S. Regional Bank stocks took a hit on Monday, including Zions Bank Corp., based in Salt Lake City, whose stocks were down -43% at one point.
How is Utah impacted by the SVB collapse?
Cox says one of the major concerns (as far as Utah is concerned) was payroll. Utah firms who pay their employees through Silicon Valley Bank might not get those checks to come through if their deposits weren’t covered. “We know that hundreds of businesses were impacted and thousands of employees would have been impacted. It could have been devastating to our state…If the Feds didn’t step up, the State would have. To make sure we are helping those who are struggling.”
Who were some of “those who were struggling?” Companies with large deposits in SVB include:
Circle, $3.3 billion
Roku, $487 million
BlockFi, $227 million
Roblox, $150 million
Ginkgo Bio, $74 million
iRhythm, $55 million
Rocket Lab, $38 million
Sangamo Therapeutics, $34 million
Lending Club, $21 million
Payoneer, $20 million
We know a number of Utah firms—like Kickstart Seed Fund, a Utah-based venture capital firm—were clients of Silicon Valley Bank, which had offices in Salt Lake City (2750 E. Cottonwood Parkway).
Over the past 24 hours we have been closely monitoring the SVB solvency challenges. We recognize the serious impact this has on many Utah firms with significant assets at risk. We will push regulators and federal partners to work quickly for stability, certainty and solutions. https://t.co/Xq669UmQKm
Silicon Valley Bank announced “a support and back-operations facility” in Salt Lake City, Utah. “The facility is part of the company’s business continuity strategy to ensure the continuous availability of critical client operations in the event of an unforeseen disaster,” read the press release. “With the opening of this facility in Salt Lake City, we are ensuring that we can perform all essential operations independently, even if our resources in other parts of the country are temporarily or permanently disabled,” said Lynda Ward Pierce, then head of Human Resources for Silicon Valley Bank.
August 2008: SVB expands in Utah
SVB announces its expanding presence in Utah. “Silicon Valley Bank has worked closely with Utah’s technology, life science and private equity firms, offering financing solutions, treasury management, corporate investment and international banking services,” read the press release. “Silicon Valley Bank is a critical part of the technology community in Utah and we’re glad to see they are making this a permanent location,” said Will West, CEO, Control4 Corporation. “Silicon Valley Bank helps give an emerging technology company its best shot at success and we’re grateful for its partnership.”
May 2017: SVB gets a bigger Utah office
SVB announces its move to a larger location in Utah. “The Utah innovation economy has experienced dramatic growth in the last 10 years,” said Gary Jackson, managing director for Silicon Valley Bank in Salt Lake City, in the press release. “The quality and diversity of local companies forming along with greater VC investment in the region have created a robust ecosystem. Our new, larger space will allow us to foster increased collaboration with our clients and the investment community.”
2020: SVB enjoys tech boom, low interest rates
During the pandemic, Silicon Valley Bank’s deposit base starts growing exponentially, thanks to a tech boom. The bank invests the lionshare of its funds in bonds that typically deliver consistent returns when interest rates are low.
2022: Interest rates rise
The Fed raises interest rates, and the tech industry hits a bit of a slump—two things that SVB investments depend on.
February 2023: SVB executive sells millions in company stock
C-level executives at the SVB sell off more company shares. CNBC reports Silicon Valley Bank CEO sold $30 million in stock over the last two years and $3.6 million in a single day in February.
Early March 2023: SVB Snow Summit in Deer Valley
The Financial Times reports that, “40 chief financial officers from various technology groups gathered in the Utah ski resort of Deer Valley for an annual ‘snow summit’ hosted by Silicon Valley Bank.”
March 8, 2023: SVB plan to shore-up losses
SVB announces plan to raise $2.25 billion in common equity and preferred convertible stock after it sold a portfolio of Treasury and mortgage bonds at a $1.8 billion loss.
March 9, 2023: Depositers make a run on the bank
SVB clients start pulling their money from the bank after some apparent encouragement on Twitter. That amounts to $42 billion of deposit withdrawals, in a “run” on the bank.
March 10, 2023: SVB shut down
Regulators shut down Silicon Valley Bank. The FDIC takes control.
March 12, 2023: Government ‘backstop’
The FDIC says in a statement that depositors will have access to all of their money starting Monday, claiming that no losses will be borne by the taxpayer.
The current state of Utah schoollibraries is such that teachers and librarians stand accused of peddling pornography and sexually grooming and indoctrinating children. Members of school boards have had to appear before the legislature to defend them. “We’ve had police arrive at a library because someone had reported that there were people peddling pornography to children, which scared our librarians and made them less effective,” said Mark Clement, Board Chair of Alpine School District, at a November 2022 meeting of the Utah Legislature’s Education Interim Committee.
The State of Banned Books in Utah: How did we get here?
“The past few years, it seems like they’ve gone from challenging types of education to coming after libraries instead.” Michele Edgley is the current President of the Utah Educational Library Media Association and the Uintah Elementary Library Technology Teacher. “It’s a small group of people who are behind it,” she says. The accusations and the calls to the police come from parent interest groups who have strong beliefs about which books should not be available to students.
These parent groups were emboldened by the passage of H.B. 374, which targets “sensitive material” in schools, during the 2022 Utah Legislative Session. Even before that, Utah school librarians started seeing a spike in official and unofficial book challenges, more than ever before, during the 2020-2021 school year. Some librarians say they’d been following the trend in other states before it reached Utah. These parent groups would show up at every school district with the same script and the same list of books they wanted gone. “Often these books have been available for decades, and it wasn’t a problem before. Then, all of a sudden, it’s a problem,” says one Utah librarian whose district was targeted by such an effort.
Let’s talk about H.B. 374
H.B. 374 instructs local education agencies to develop and implement policy to keep “sensitive material” that is “harmful to minors” or “pornographic or indecent” out of school libraries. Supporters have latched onto the definition of pornographic material—laid out in Utah legal code 76-10-1227—and argue that any book that depicts anything in that definition should be categorically banned without consideration for the merit of the book as a whole. Such bright-line rules have a tendency to be challenged in court and found unconstitutional.
Legal challenges are exactly what school districts want to avoid. In a November 2022 district board meeting, the legal counsel for Canyons School District explained, “Why can’t we just do a 1227 analysis and be done? Because we would probably lose in court. The court would require us to review that work as a whole.” And, because the State only covers school districts in cases with monetary damages and not injunctive, the school district would be on their own in defending an expensive lawsuit. So, in order to operate in a legally sound way, when a sensitive material complaint or challenge is made about a book in a Canyons school library, it kicks off a multi-step, multi-pronged review process to thread the needle between state law and the First Amendment.
“It’s really strange to me that the legislature created new legislation without input from librarians,” says Edgely. “And it was for something that already existed.” Most libraries already had a reconsideration policy in place prior to H.B. 374. And, if parents are worried about their child reading a specific book, a parent could (and still can) restrict access to their own student by contacting the library. Parents already had the power to control the books checked out by their own children, so why are a small minority of parents trying to take that decision-making power from all other parents? Multiple recent surveys, including The American Family Survey by Deseret News and BYU, show the majority of Americans and parents support their public schools’ library collections and oppose banning books, even in the face of some parental objections.
Opponents of H.B. 374 and the recent push to ban certain books say this is more about censorship and squashing ideas and identities that make some people uncomfortable. At that same legislative committee meeting, Park City High School student Jackson Smith spoke on behalf of his fellow students, “My understanding of H.B. 374 is that it has taken away a lot of our freedoms,” he says. “When you look at the list of books coming from other states’ versions of this house bill, you notice it isn’t targeted at protecting students. It’s meant to hide marginalized voices.”
Indeed, some of these efforts seem to have backfired. More than one librarian quipped to Salt Lake magazine that they could use the list of targeted books as shopping lists. It goes beyond school libraries as well. Ken Sanders of Salt Lake City’s eponymous Ken Sanders Rare Books is of a similar mind. “I would like to thank all the self-righteous parents for publishing lists of books that they would like to see banned in our schools. You are providing me with a list of books to order and carry in my bookshop. I call this process ‘unbanning’ banned books. As parents, we all have a sacred right to choose what books and materials our own children read. That is part of our democracy. But when you choose to ban books from others reading them, you have crossed a sacred line. For every book, you ban I will order in 10 copies and unban it!”
What now?
According to Edgely, much of this trouble could have been avoided by parents and librarians working together, a better understanding of all that is required of librarians and more support for school libraries in general. “Why legislate instead of meeting with the librarian and finding your child a different book?” she asks. “I’m happy to have somebody tell me they want a book reconsidered, but read the whole thing and be prepared to discuss it in committee. That book might be needed by other children in their school, and an individual parent might not know that, but a librarian would.”
Librarians put a lot of care into curating their collections, often reading hundreds of books a year. They’ll look at the book needs for the entire student population, what students are currently checking out and surveys on their interests. “Librarians love working with children. That’s why we do it,” says Edgely. “Any time I consider a book, I look at how I can teach from it and how it will impact my students. Students will come in and suggest books to me, and I will read them.” There might be no one in the world more passionate about the power of reading than a librarian. Librarians are concerned about the real crises going on in student populations, including mental health and literacy, which they say could be addressed by well-funded libraries and reading from collections that are current and well-maintained by librarians.
It’s the job certified teacher-librarians are trained for, requiring not just a Bachelor’s in Teaching, but a minor in Librarianship or a Master’s in Library Science. Edgely says, ideally, there would be certified librarians in every district and school and specialized training for all library staff, which currently is not the case. Librarians say the general understanding of what occurs in a library is very narrow compared to the potential if those libraries were not underfunded and understaffed. Or not threatened by having the police called to them.
“Librarians in Utah are amazing people that work doubly hard to help students,” says Edgely. “We’re a great support system. Go and work with your librarian to see what they can do to help you.” She says librarians are willing to work with the Utah State Legislature, too, even after H.B. 374, which took school districts hundreds of hours to implement and the ongoing process could require more funding as well. “We’re happy to do what the legislators want us to do, but we want them to understand what it’s going to take to fund libraries statewide.”
Learn more about the surge in book challenges in 2021.
Today, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announces it is fining the Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints and its investment arm, Ensign Peak Advisors, $1 million and $4 million, respectively, for a scheme to conceal the value of the church’s assets. The SEC order shows that the LDS Church’s investment firm, with the knowledge of its First Presidency, used shell companies to obscure the church’s investment wealth. Based on the order, the motivation appears to be saving face, over fear that public knowledge of the church’s wealth would lead to negative consequences in light of the size of the church’s portfolio.
The LDS Church responded with a statement claiming these “mistakes” have been addressed and that they have been in compliance with federal disclosure laws since June 2019. This newfound compliance with the law came shortly after an IRS whistleblower complaint revealed the church’s holdings are valued around $100 billion.
So, how did we get here? Here’s a timeline outlining the events leading up to the SEC’s investigation and eventual penalty for the LDS Church’s illegal financial reporting practices.
1997
The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints creates Ensign Peak to manage the church’s investment assets. At its inception, Ensign Peak initially managed approximately $7 billion of church assets, according to the SEC order, a significant percentage of which consisted of Section 13F Securities. The portion of 13F Securities in the portfolio grew to approximately $37.8 billion by 2020. Investment managers who oversee a portfolio of public equities above a certain threshold are required to file Forms 13F with the SEC quarterly. These forms disclose the names of the securities and their values.
1998
Senior management at Ensign Peak are made aware of Ensign Peak’s requirement to file Forms 13F and communicate this requirement to senior leadership of the church, according to the SEC.
The SEC order states: “Throughout its history, at least once each year, Ensign Peak’s Managing Director met with the senior leadership of the Church to discuss Ensign Peak’s activities, including the LLC Structure. Unanimous approval from the senior leadership of the Church was required before Ensign could deviate from the LLC Structure and file Forms 13F in Ensign Peak’s own name.”
2000s
With approval from The First Presidency of the LDS Church, Ensign Peak establishes the first of its shell companies (LLCs) that each file Forms 13F instead of a single aggregated filing. The SEC order states this is because “The Church was concerned that disclosure of the assets in the name of Ensign Peak, a known Church affiliate, would lead to negative consequences in light of the size of the Church’s portfolio.”
Church leaders, including then-president Elder Gordon B. Hinckley, continue to tell members and the public that all of the church’s assets are “money-consuming and not money-producing assets.”
April 2003
After the church earmarks the money for the City Creek shopping center, President Hinckley tells members at the LDS General Conference, “We have felt it imperative to do something to revitalize this area. But I wish to give the entire Church the assurance that tithing funds have not and will not be used to acquire this property. Nor will they be used in developing it for commercial purposes.”
March 2005
According to the SEC order, the LDS Church becomes aware that the public might link this first LLC to the church because the person signing the Forms 13F is listed in a public directory as a Church employee. To address this issue, the senior leadership of the Church approves a new shell company to be created with “better care being taken to ensure that neither the ‘Street’ nor the media [could] connect the new entity to Ensign Peak.”
May 2011
The church’s senior leadership approves Ensign Peak’s recommendation to “clone” the second LLC to create new Form 13F filers, after Ensign Peak expresses concern that its portfolio was so large that the filings under the name of the second shell company might attract unwanted attention. The order outlines that the church’s investment firm creates five new entities under which to make 13F filings.
2014
The Church Audit Department (CAD) conducts the first of two internal audits of Ensign Peak (the second audit in 2017). In discussions with senior management, CAD highlights the risk that the SEC might disagree with the approach of the LLC Structure.
November 2015
Ensign Peak forms six additional clone LLCs, bringing the total to 12 shell companies, after Ensign Peak became aware that a third party appeared to have connected the holdings of various LLCs back to Ensign Peak. The order states that the senior leadership of the Church approves a plan to “gradually and carefully adapt Ensign Peak’s corporate structure to strengthen the portfolio’s confidentiality.”
May 2018
The Truth and Transparency website links various entities to the Church, their filings revealing holdings of approximately $32 billion. Following the report, two Ensign Peak business managers resign, voicing concerns about what they had been asked to do.
The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints issues a press release, Church Finances and a Growing Global Faith, claiming that the Church uses it resources for religious and charitable causes and those resources come principally from the tithing donations of Church members with a small portion of funds from businesses maintained by the Church. It goes on to say that the church sets aside money for its reserves, which include “stocks and bonds, taxable businesses, agricultural interests and commercial and residential property,” and those reserves are overseen by Church leaders and managed by professional advisers.
November 2019
David A. Nielsen, a former money manager at Ensign Peak, the investment management branch of the Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints, files a whistleblower complaint with the IRS. First reported by The Washington Post, Nielsen claims that Ensign Peak had a $100 billion reserve portfolio from stockpiling charitable donations rather than using them for charitable purposes—possibly breaching federal tax rules. The whistleblower complaint accuses LDS church leaders of misleading members about how their donations are spent. (Members are encouraged to donate 10% of their earnings as tithings to the church to remain in good standing and participate in religious ceremonies and services in its temples.) The complaint also accuses the church of using the tax-exempt donations for business ventures like the City Creek shopping center.
December 2019
After the whistleblower complaint makes headlines, The First Presidency of the LDS Church responds to the with a statement:
“We take seriously the responsibility to care for the tithes and donations received from members. The vast majority of these funds are used immediately to meet the needs of the growing Church including more meetinghouses, temples, education, humanitarian work and missionary efforts throughout the world. Over many years, a portion is methodically safeguarded through wise financial management and the building of a prudent reserve for the future. This is a sound doctrinal and financial principle taught by the Savior in the Parable of the Talents and lived by the Church and its members. All Church funds exist for no other reason than to support the Church’s divinely appointed mission.
Claims being currently circulated are based on a narrow perspective and limited information. The Church complies with all applicable law governing our donations, investments, taxes, and reserves. We continue to welcome the opportunity to work with officials to address questions they may have.”
February 2020
Roger Clarke, the head of Ensign Peak, tells The Wall Street Journal that LDS leaders wanted to keep the church’s $100 billion reserve a secret because they were afraid, upon seeing the church’s amassed wealth, some members might stop paying tithing. “[Paying tithing] is more of a sense of commitment than it is the church needing the money,” said Clarke “So they never wanted to be in a position where people felt like, you know, they shouldn’t make a contribution.”
March 2020
For the first time, Ensign Peak publicly discloses the earnings and investments of the LDS Church’s largest stock portfolio, filing a consolidated Form 13F for the quarter ended in December 31, 2019, rather than under the names of separate LLCs. The 13F Securities are valued at approximately $37.8 billion.
November 2022
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s “The Fifth Estate” reveals, since 2007, the LDS church has raised in Canada more than $1 billion (CAD) and sent it from the Canadian church to BYU. That’s about 70% of the tithing money collected from Canadian members.
January 2023
Whistleblower David A. Nielsen calls on the Senate to investigate the LDS Church and Ensign Peak Advisors for tax fraud. He files a 90-page memorandum with the Senate Finance Committee, obtained by Religion Unplugged, which shows “evidence of false statements, systematic accounting fraud” and violations of tax laws. It goes on to say, “For at least 22 years, [Ensign Peak] and certain senior executives have perpetrated an unlawful scheme that relies onwillfully and materially false statements to the IRS and the SEC, so this for-profit, securities investment business that unfairly competes with large hedge funds can masquerade as a tax-exempt, charitable organization.”
February 2023
The Wall Street Journal reports that the SEC is investigating Ensign Peak for allegedly concealing its multibillion-dollar portfolio for years.
Two weeks later, the SEC files an order and sends out a press release, announcing charges against the Church for these violations. To settle the charges, Ensign Peak agrees to pay a $4 million penalty and the LDS Church agrees to pay a $1 million penalty.
Gurbir S. Grewal, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, says, “We allege that the LDS Church’s investment manager, with the Church’s knowledge, went to great lengths to avoid disclosing the Church’s investments, depriving the Commission and the investing public of accurate market information. The requirement to file timely and accurate information on Forms 13F applies to all institutional investment managers, including non-profit and charitable organizations.”
The church issues a statement in response to the settlement with the SEC, saying in part:
“In June 2019, the SEC first expressed concern about Ensign Peak’s reporting approach. Ensign Peak adjusted its approach and began filing a single aggregated report. Since that time, 13 quarterly reports have been filed in full accordance with SEC requirements.
This settlement relates to how the forms were filed previously. Ensign Peak and the Church have cooperated with the government over a period of time as we sought resolution.
We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed.”
