worth working for, worth fighting for,
worth dying for, because it's the only
thing that lasts"
- Gerald O'Hare, Gone With The Wind
Break out your crying towels people. The
Unlike earlier, however, it isn't the Ogden Wal-Mart project they're weeping about now. They've barely whimpered over that grand disappointment for almost a full week. Whatever therapy they're taking seems to be working, at least on the Wal-Mart topic.
Now it's the Riverwalk Project that's getting them all weepy and misty-eyed. They'll most certainly be needing additional therapy on this as the facts unfold. Loyal Sanduskey Standard-Examiner readers should have seen this coming, of course, with this article, which was published last week, reporting (shudder) that several property owners within Ogden City's Riverwalk project were "holding out," just like a few of them did on the Wal-Mart project.
What the heck's wrong with these people(?), the Standard-Examiner editors ask. Don't they realize they're standing in the way of "progress?" Don't they know that they're thwarting "the greater good" mantras of the eight or so boy genius "planners" who pull down six figure a year "planning salaries" each for Ogden City? Do these anti-social property owners have any idea how much effort local government
One of the readers on another thread suggested that somebody should question these "holdouts" about their reasons and motives. For my own part, I believe that such a query is entirely unnecessary, and that any answer they may provide is irrelevant. It's their property; and they indicate they don't choose to sell. That ought to be reason enough. Such would be good enough in a truly free society, at least.
Having thrown in my two cents on the subject, you can read today's Std-Ex editorial right here on this very blog. Those gentle readers who are squeamish about heavy doses of guilt-manipulation probably ought not read this, however.
Once you've absorbed the editorial and recovered a little bit from the Std-Ex editorial board's latest outpouring of uncontrollable grief, I have another article for you to read. Entitled The Forgotten Fundamental Right, By Steven Greenhut, it's a nifty little article that clearly articulates the nature of private property rights in a presumedly non-communal and free society such as ours is touted to be. I'll provide a short excerpt here:
But property. Everyone can understand that. I buy a piece of land, build a house on it and live in it with my family - and the state can't bother me unless I'm harboring a fugitive or in some other rare instances. That's freedom. That's the basis for everything we as Americans are supposed to stand for.Be sure to read the entire article. It really is quite good.
And it's something that's continually under assault in America today. It's not just the politicians who view as arcane the traditional concept of property rights, but an increasing number of The People themselves - the very individuals whose lives are what they are because the founders understood the importance of property.
Let's face it. A socialist ethic has taken hold in America. Every time I write a column defending people's property rights against eminent domain or some incursion by envix ronmentalists backed by the power of the state, readers complain that I am a tool of big business or a greedy person seeking profits. Can't I understand that these issues are complicated, and that property rights have to yield to the greater good of saving the planet or eliminating blight or promoting responsible planning?
What these critics advocate is a form of majoritarianism, in which everyone has a say on everyone else's business. It's the antithesis of what the American founding is all about, and the perfect embodiment of the oft-quoted definition of democracy: Two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
These "obstructionist" holdouts ought to be able to say "No, thank you," and that ought to be the end of the discussion. That's how it would be, anyway, in a truly free, non-communalist society.
Your comments are invited as usual.
40 comments:
I agree 100% with what you've said Rudi, but I feel as if there's just one thing to add. Down here in Centerville, I've heard people say things like "It's Wal-Mart's land, they should be able to do whatever they want with it." People have the fundamental right to own a piece of property (unless it is truly needed for something like a road). But I don't think that people have the fundamental right to do anything they want with their property. That's why we have zoning laws. If I own a quarter-acre lot in a residential subdivison, I don't have the right to use the land for a garbage dump, even though it's my property. Likewise, I don't think that a retail company should have the right to build a 22.54 acre store/parking lot on property that is bordered by residential development on two sides.
This kind of stuff makes my blood boil. I think that emminent domain should always have been used as a last resort, last-ditch, last among lasts resort.
Emminent domain was originally established to help city's work towards the common good... meaning that it was to keep harm from the city's citizens. Emminent domain should only be used were real harm could come about without the use of it. A.K.A... condemned buildings, usafe living/ working conditions, and only things along this line.
What emminent domain has become is taking away that which is yours because I want it. That is what it boils down to. It is government sanctioned stealing.
Put yourself in the same position. All that work that you spent on your own piece of property... all the memories... all the plans... everything that you put into that piece of property is taken because someone else wants it for some other purpose.
Property and the right to own property is the absolute most basic tenet of democracy and free enterprise. Anything else is communistic.
One of the major problems of doing business in China for American companies, is that the idea of private property, whether intellectual or real, is ignored. The government there does not do much about the problem. Why? Because they are communists. They have driven into people that they do not own anything. If they do not own anything, then everyone else owns nothing. It is their property as much as it is yours.
By the way, 'fair-market-value' can only be set by the market. People make up that market. The people who are 'holding out' for more money have become the supply side for that market. They have a salable commodity that others want. They can set whatever price they damn well please. That is market economics. Welcome to a free country people.
I don't notice the Standard whining about their 1st amendment rights... why do they want others to give up theirs?
So fine....oh so very fine. Both posts. The thread. It all fits. It all clicks. Our City government and community development arm have gone haywire. We need to take it back, for indeed we are for the citizens and we are the citizens. That basic premise has been forgotten by those who rubber stamp the mayor and the mayor himself. It's a shame we have come to this.
In my opinion, we are getting to pretty much the last option in Ogden.
The "last option," Utmorman? Taking an indivual's home and giving it to another individual? What are you thinking about, son? A man's home is his Palace, his Castle, and neither the government nor King Kong has the right to decide that it isn't serving its purpose and that were it in somebody else's hands the people and new owner would be oh so much better off.
The RDA trick....declare blight, bond up some money, take some property, finance somebody to construct the RDA's dream, then pay the money back through tax increment. Not to worry about the person whose home they took. Not to worry if the project goes bust. Not to worry if the project works and everyone gets paid back....everyone but those who need it the most, the schools, public services, capital improvements. Those entities will get their end 20-25 years down the road.
A person's property is one of a kind, unique, so how can it be replaced if taken away from him by the government and given to another. Last option. Would you be so callous if the City were taking away your father's and mother's home? Would you just saunter on over and say, "Mom, Dad, were down to this. It's our last option. We need your home jfor the big box store or the new development. You understand, don't you?"
Think about it, Utmorman.
Utmortmon will no doubt moderate his socialist views on property, when he accumulates some of his own.
You bring up some very interesting points Centerville citizen. I think your getting into some grey areas. If that retail store's land is zoned commercial/retail your saying they don't have the right to build their store, but you support zoning laws. You can't have it both ways.
Guess what, there's such a thing as bad zoning. It's bad zoning when you have a parcel zoned for a 22.54 acre superstore that's adjacent to residential zones. That's why people really need to keep a close eye on how cities zone things. We've all heard the saying "Just because it's legal doesn't make it right."
Sir,
I will have you know that I purchased property within Ogden City specifically so that I could get involved in what goes on in this city. I tried to get on committees, etc. in this city but was told that I need to live within the city limits to have a good chance of participating. So what did I do? I puchased a house within the city limits. We liked the house, but most of the reason for moving into the city limits was to get involved. So don't EVER accuse me of not putting my money where my mouth is, because I assure you that I have and will continue to do so.
I wlll also take to task recent posts.
I don't necessarilly completely agree with RDA's or eminant domain, but I feel almost forced to at least present a snippit of another view because of the blatently one-sided views presented by this blog. In addition to the one-sided views, it seems that we have one or a few people who like to make the same point over and over again with twenty different "names." These people sometimes appear again, sometimes don't, but they "conveniently" come out of the woods to make it seem like somebody trying to at least throw a bone to another point of view has no legs to stand on. That honestly frustrates me. It is esecially frustrating when these "people" use the same points (which they know is a very emotional argument not wise to come back on), and use the same writing style to make those same points trying to bait somebody into an argument in which they will probably turn around and have fifty different "people" make them look stupid. This forum should be a place to discuss mano a mano, not a place where it can be one person vs. one person using a thousand different names. Sure, I could play that game and use different "personalities" to make my points, but I don't think it is the best route, nor will I play that game. For this forum to be truly successfull and good for the area, people should not feel like they cannot make a point because one person acting as fifty can make them look and feel foolish for even bringing up a point of view.
Again, as I said before, I don't wholly agree with RDA's or eminant domain, but at least having somewhat of a balanced argument on a site that claims to be a place for both sided to come together seems to be something very important to me. Some of you can point to my blog as being one-sided, but I have presented it that way from the beginning and stated that it would be about what I termed to be "good" in Ogden. I have never presented it as something balanced and even.
I may be young and inexperienced, but that does not mean that I am stupid, and I will not be made to be the fool. Now, one person acting as fifty, or two acting as one-hundred, you may commence aiming the entire firing squad at me.
I'm sorry that you feel so attacked, utmorman. I think it just comes with the territory though. I've really had to put up with a lot of crap for taking some stands on issues down here. You just have to have a thick skin. And as long as you're always open-minded and are always trying to understand things in the most logical way, you can be at peace with yourself, even if there are other people trying to bash you.
Utmorman, you assume so much. The one guy who had many monikers was the president, now banished in disgrace. Writing styles might be similar, but water does seek its own level. You do an injustice to the many who contribute. And FOX NEWS you're not.
I think what has you in a tizzy is the fact that we present good, logical facts when posting our positions. As you say, you are young (but you gaining some experience) but don't let that fact, along with our differing points of view, lull you into a state of self importance. We post what we post as "our views," not because of you and your views. It ain't all about jousting with you my friend. You're certainly welcome to jump into the fray, but don't be confused as to our ideologies and the reason that we post 'em.
Don't feel picked on, don't feel that it's you vs. 1 0r 2, just get on with the show.
You do get one BIG GOLD STAR, along with this lecture, for putting Marko is his place regarding your ownership of property and trying to "get involved." Bravo. That's the Utmorman we've come to enjoy and respect, so simmer down and keep posting.
I'm The Counselor and my advice is free, but I will accept donations. Send them to Filliaga's Re-election committee!
UTmorman, Well... I for one only post under one 'hat' since I stopped being an anonymous poster. Hopefully, this will assuage some of your fears.
I did have a chance to check out your blog, and I would say that, while I personally dislike the way that the city government does business in many of its dealings, I don't think Ogden is all bad. Matter of fact, I own a business here, and I have become very active in the community. I have been all over the country, and I too see potential here. Why else would I have put down roots here?
What you see as detractors to Ogden, could simply be people who are concerned about the direction and the amount of debt they see flowing from the city government. Being a former SC surfer turned snowboarder, I even like the idea of a wave pool here. I just don't think the city should be the 'land-lord'.
I noticed on your walk-about in Ogden that you shot many 'good' things that have happened here in the last few years. I would agree that most of the changes are good. I would question your premise though. Just because you agree with the good that is done in an area, does not mean that you have to agree with the city governments goals or path to those goals.
Most of the projects you mention are right in line with the way that I think this city should be run. Most of these projects were developed through loans to current and fledging entrepreneurs. They had nothing to do with the government. The Farmer's Market is very cool, and that was brought about by a few local artists and growers who wanted a venue to sell their works and produce. The city really had nothing to do with it. They allocate a very tiny amount of their budget to the growth of art in the community.
Another project with Ogden Blue and the clock tower building was undertaken by the city. Ogden Blue has a beautiful space that was helped along by the Business Information Center. Richard Scott took on that risk, and he is liable for its failure or success. This is the way things should be. That was the extent of the city involvement there.
The clock tower is still dealing with the contention that seems to surround any city venture. It is this and many other examples that gives me trepidation about the Rec Center or any other large venture using our tax dollars.
The success of 25th Street is the direct result of entrepreneurs creating something that everyone wants to visit. Period. They took the risks, and I hope every one of them is enjoying the rewards of those risks. 25th Street was already rising as a star before the Mayor took office. I don't see how he could possibly lay claim to any success there.
On the other hand, the transportation hub was over on costs and has yet to deliver the promise of a booming Ogden. The president's bizarre post about the Mayor forcing the IRS to relocate to downtown is a little far-fetched. I would say that a case for the betterment of the surrounding community and the case for a good solid workforce were the keys to the success of that particular project. I don't know much about this project, and I don't care to speculate on what I don't know.
What I was saying about the city's plan for the future is to encourage business without getting involved directly in the ownership of land for profit. That is the right and responsibility of those who make a place what it is... the citizens and the businesspeople.
I would like to see the city encouraging growth while keeping the underpinnings of that growth firmly in place (a.k.a. sewers, potable water, roads, parks, etc.).
Here is something that I see in Utah, criticism is somehow bad. Disagreement is somehow bad. If you have a problem with something... you should just be quiet. If you point out a flaw in my plan, you hate me. The Mayor is especially bad about this. I can agree that a certain something needs to be done, and totally disagree in the methods in which you accomplish that something. I can love a place and see the opportunity, and I can get damned mad about a bully that tries to push everyone around. It doesn't mean that I hate the place because of the bully that lives there as well. Most of the people on this blog wouldn't be here unless they cared about the city... that is just stupid. It would be even more stupid to spend the amount of time researching and writing about something that they didn't care about.
That is my reason for being here. I hope this makes you feel at home, please keep posting... I like the fact that you don't agree with everyone here. That, after all, is usually how the best things come about.
I certainly did not want to cast a blanket over everybody here as using many different names. But I can assrue you that it happens quite a bit on this site. I must also say that I do respect all of your opinions. In fact, being someone who is in favor of a Wal-Mart in Ogden and the riverfront project but that just does not know all of the details, you all have made me wonder just where I stand on those issues. But there is no way you can tell me that "Would you be so callous if the City were taking away your father's and mother's home? Would you just saunter on over and say, "Mom, Dad, were down to this. It's our last option. We need your home for the big box store or the new development. You understand, don't you?"" is in any way a logical argument. I know for a fact that some of the main posters on this site are in favor of Wal-Mart, and/or other projects. What I am saying is that there must be some sort of reason why these people do not feel inclined to share thier opinoins about this subject, and a main reason that I can come up with is what I have mentioned. With that in mind, it is probably not just me feeling this way.
I also would not expect anybody to cater to me or argue just with me. That is just selfish; nearly as selfish as making your view seem like an overwhelming majority.
What I posted, I posted because it has been simmering in my head for quite a while, so maybe the festering made my words come out a little harsh. I love this place, as well as the dialogue here, but c'mon folks, let's have the other side of the argument presented at some point in time. As I said before, I am not completely in favor of all that is RDA, but I at least want to know the other side.
Utmorman, as for the WalMart and Riverwalk projects, my thoughts are this: I would love to see a WalMart somewhere in town. I'd also enjoy a Riverfront type shopping and community area Palm Desert, CA has a gorgeous shopping area called Rivers that is beyond description, as does San Antonio, and those places flat ROCK). But not at the price of taking a person's home from him or her. We have the inalienable right to own property and seek quiet enjoyment therein. Therefore, the bit about you and telling your parents that we need their house is OK, because it's "our last option," is pertinent, I'm afraid. You have, by your posts, shown you're mostly in favor of that. Just as long as it doesn't effect you and yours.
Your last post delved into the people on this blog who are not inclined to share their reasons on WalMart, (Riverwalk and others, inc. the rec center, I'd imagine). You must not be reading, for as I wrote in this first paragraph, the reasons are that the City thinks treading on the rights of the property owner and the Constitution, plus the way they have managed most of their big time projects right into the ground, is reprehensible. It's not that some of these projects are not wanted, hell, I can read a P & L and a Balance Sheet and can see what the WalMart in Harrisville has done for that community, but I don't agree with the way that the City Administration has gone about it in their approach as to how to prosecute these undertakings. It may be the same old thing, post after post, but those are the two biggest reasons of questioning the City's process....what they have done, and how they've gone about doing it, JUST DON'T WORK!
So there ya go. Read it and weep.
An interesting thing about this move is the timing. Very close to the failed WalMart project, and equally close to the proposed public hearings on the mall. Strategically speaking, it may be an attempt to divert attention away from both, and we might want to look at that.
I do not agree at all with government moving in and taking people's homes away for business development. That said---don't you think these attempted land grabs are getting somewhat comic?
As in....
"Having been successfully repulsed from the proposed WalMart area, (Well done, brave citizens!!) the Dark Forces are now moving towards the Riverfront..."
We should write a melodrama about this, and perform it annually at.....a Street Fair, maybe?
You know what Toad, you bring up a lot of really good points. A lot of times it's easy to fall into the simplistic mentality that either you fully, 100% love and agree with someone, or you're their bitter enemy. This is something that I've really had to learn down here. I might not agree with certain city officials on many points, but I don't think that they're the children of satan just because we have differing opinions on what's best for the city. It's easy to fall into the pit of dichotomous thinking. That's why you have to compromise. I actually don't have a problem with Wal-Mart coming to Centerville, I just don't think it's good zoning to have a 22.54 acre store right adjacent to so many housing units. There's another vacant 22 acre site in Centerville that I think would be quite appropriate for a Wal-Mart, and I wouldn't even have a problem with a smaller store on the proposed site (as long as it was on the corner that's farther away from the residential properties). But nobody on either side wants to listen to somebody with a solution that works out for both Wal-Mart and the ciizens. Ugh.
And I will confess, I used to be against Wal-Mart coming to Centerville at all, but now that I've really had a lot of time to think about the issue and learn more about the city and how things work, I've decided that having a Wal-Mart in Centerville is fine, but just as long as it's in an appropriate location and is designed appropriately to fit in with existing development.
With all do respect, Counselor, all of the goings on do affect me and mine. The quality of schools and the quality of life in this city afect me and mine as well as you and yours. Speaking from the bottom of my heart, I would like to believe that I would be willing to "take one for the team" if I truly believed that it would help the greater good. Now, with that said, I am certainly not in that position, and therefore cannot say with a certainty, but in the depths of my heart I like to believe that I would do that. You can fire away at that statement all you want, but that is my true thought. I actually had quite a bit of time to think about that this last year. There was a baseball field that I literally spent most of three summers playing pick-up baseball with some childhood friends. The memories I made on all of those days were priceless. They become more priceless as I see the different paths that most of the young boys that I played with have taken. They have lives very differnet than mine, but we all have those same memories. Right now on that baseball field is being a constructed a church. I truly get a bit sad when I go by this field, even though it is my faith building the church. In my mind, I always wanted that field to be there, after all, I spent very, very large quantities of time there playing pick-up baseball, football, softball, and anything else we could find to play. You know, they did not even save the very old and large trees. As I thought more about it, however, I came to the conclusion that that field was going to go to a better cause. My memories there were made, and will always be in my head, as well as my heart. even though this experience is not an exact comparison, I feel that it gave me some insight into what these people could be feeling, and I know that it would be very, very hard for some of them. All I ask from you, counselor, is to not ever accuse me of wanting something just because it "doesn't affect me and mine." I can attempt to put myself in their shoes and try to empathize with them. That may not be good enough, but it is all I can do. I am certainly not a heartless politician trying to make a buck and not caring about what happens to other people because it "doesn't affect me and mine." I subcribe to the theory that we are all in this together. If the city is to get better, it will be a combined effort. Also, do not ever question my "morals" because of my beliefs.
With all of that said, this has been a good discussion. Possibly even as interesting as discussions at the big house this morning. Again, I will repeat that I do not totally side with eminant domain or RDA's, but I do want a Wal-Mart within the Ogden City limits. So, instead of taking an entire month to critize the idea that most of us seem to want, just maybe not the method of going about it, why don't we help our our city council and come up with ideas as to where a Wal-Mart can be located. I'll start out by asking quesions about the property across the street from the D.I. I had heard that that property is owned by the Church, but I am not sure about it. Now, don't skirt this idea like my last one of defining what is and is not an obstructionist in the community. Of course, if it is simply not interesting, tell me and we will move on. But I really believe that part of educated discussion involves coming up with alternatives, and we certainly have proved this week that we can research things and come up with alternatives.
Also, counselor, if you say you want some sort of river project, than tell us all your plan if it does not involve tearing down a single house along the area.
The bottom line, in my opinion, is to be a part of the solution instead of being a part of the problem.
Also, Centerville, have you seen the Harrisville Wal-Mart? That was placed literally in a residential area and next to an egg farm.
As it should be in Ogden, Centerville Citizen. WalMart failed because it was a simple land grab, not because it was WalMart. The same will apply to Riverfront, Riverwalk, whatever they call it. I stand by my earlier post, somebody should try to find some unoccupied land. Simple, really, but who the hell on the RDA/Council listens to the people, except Amy and Jesse?
Dian, I had to laugh at your post... it does seem like a gigantic RDA amoeba is slowly spreading across the city. It is successfully attacked by white blood cells in one area, but immediately moves onto another area. Attack of the killer RDA blob!
CC, I am not thrilled about a WalMart here to tell you the honest truth. I get feeling somewhat violent when I am in one... I don't think the human brain is really capable of taking in all that fluorescent lighting and super-white tile...
While I don't like them and will not step foot in one, I do understand market pressure. If people want it, they will get it one way or another. I don't particularly like chain-stores either. I think they serve sub-good food and are a boon to road warriors, but I think they suck (having eaten at too many of them in my road warrior days). Again... people will get what they want one way or another.
I would like to see more boutique stores and high-fashion in the downtown area, while relegating the big box retail and chain stores to 12th or BDO. I am not a retailer, however, and they would have a better idea of what will actually fly in the city.
I would like to see the city leverage the natural surroundings more, and bring in a more monied crowd. It would be very easy to do here, if Huntsville doesn't beat us to it. I would also like to keep the somewhat small-town feel... less Park City and more Jackson Hole. The ski season should be the boom-time and the other seasons would be smaller in population. This might be difficult to do here with the freeway so close, but a bit of thinking might reveal the key.
Ogden has its big boom with railroad travelers. They came to partake of vice on 25th... left their dollars... and were out on the next train. The ski industry could be exactly that same type of draw as 25th (minus the killings) but would leave us with a thriving community in the off season. Food for thought.
Utmorman, I appreciate and respect what you say, but how can you really compare some vacnat lot that you played pick-up ball in to a home that has had a family in for years? Unless you've walked in their shoes, you have no idea what a home being taken away and given to private enterprise would do to you.
As for the River project, yeah, it would be nice, but like you, where do we put it. Palm springs created and built theirs, maybe we could do the same. But we shouldn't do it at the expense of taking property from the people. Period.
I believe that I had pointed that out earlier, but at least I can try, in some way, to understand.
Hey president, everything is relative. By some people's standards Ogden isn't a city.
Hey, it appears as if Rudi deleted president's comments. I wonder why...
Yeah, I missed the whole president-getting-kicked-out thing. Please explain. There did not seem to be anything inflamitory in that post, but I could be wrong. I would like to know the whole story here so I can make a judgement. I know that somebody on my blog, which I believe to be pres., asked if he could write some guest commentaries for me. I said that he could, as long as they were in good taste. However, I would like to know Rudi's reasoning so that I can better make a judgement.
Good ridance....the president's a vulgar fool who demeans instead of debates. It's character assassination, and rudely at that. He contributed nothing but toilet trash talk to this blog. He rarely, if ever, debated issues; he just attacked the individual with foul mouthed language.
Rudi warned hi, he made one or two attempts at being civil, but then reverted back to his normal style. Now Rudi has given him the boot and he obviously plans to make it stick. If he keeps allowing this guy to worm his way back in with all of these false promises, Rudi's words will have NO TEETH.
President had his chance. Now he can read and fume instead of post.
OK,
I simply was not aware of the situation.
I believe that this town's problems began under the then leadership of one A. Stephen Dirks, the mayor who ram-rodded the first mall through, much to the citizen's objections. Prior to the inception of the mall, our city was a quaint, bustling community, with a downtown second to none. We had a voice in State politics, our elected leaders looked upon as serious, well meaning individuals and much was gleaned from the State Capitol folks during the legislative period. The downtown was vibrant, filled with independent businesses' shops and stores, the sidewalks crowded during the day, people lined up at the 4 theaters at night (the Paramount. the Orpheum, the Ogden and the Egyptian). Christmas season was especially good, stores open until 9:00 or 10:00 p.m., the salespeople friendly (they knew your name and one felt welcome when one walked through the front doors). Inside was an array of spectacular goods, your friends were there, costs were in line and competitive, and you were made to feel like "somebody." At 9:00 a.m. the next day, it started all over again. The buildings had ambiance, both exterior visually and inside. There was character. There was atmosphere. In those days, "going downtown" meant something. Things were good in Ogden.
The city had the railroad, 25th street, Swifts Packing, the IRS, car dealerships right here in town, and banks built by local, independent business people, and doctors who made house calls. As I stated, Ogden had clout at the Legislature. And it seemed that the sky was the limit, especially when one considered our best kept secret, Snow Basin. Skiing in the winter, sports car hill climbs on the old road in the Summer. Boating at Pineview and fishing the Ogden River. A World Class Rodeo and the Days of 47 Celebration. The people turned out in droves. Lagoon, with that famous wooden structured Roller-coaster, the Hammer, and of course those great groups (the Beach Boys, Janis Joplin, Johnny Mathas) that performed in the Terrace. WSC football and basketball were small college nationally ranked, the stadium and events center packed. High school rivalries filled the seats. Night life here just flat rocked.
And then came the mall. Our neighbors, those who ran those great business like Buehler-Bingham, the Cellar, B & B, LR Samuels, Perkins Ltd. were faced with a choice: re-locate at the mall or try to stave off the inevitable. Neither worked. The buildings that adorned Washington Blvd. quickly went into a state of decay. Physical and economic obsolesence ruled. The mall was basically a hideous looking building on the outside (inside, not too bad, but it failed to compare with the other malls that Earnest Haun had built) and the parking terrace was filled with vandalism and crime, not to mention the claustrophobic feeling within. There were rapes, cars damaged, a lack of security, water dripping from here and there (in fact, it had to be closed for repairs and or upgrades during or not long after the Grand Opening). It didn't take long, what with the high rents and parking woes, for the anchor tennants to leave, the local owners quickly followed suit, and the mall became the home of T-shirt shops and Carmel Corn stores. Business went South, to the Newgate Mall, and the rest is history. If the mayor wants to rid the town of blight, he should begin on Washington Blvd., not in neighborhoods filled with people's homes.
For unknown reasons, City Government has failed to grasp what made our city great and desirable in the past....it's character and the local businesses that made on feel at home and drew you in because of the way they operated. We do have 25th Street, but that renovation began back in the late 70s-early 80s, about the time that the then Hilton Hotel was being built. Brave, risk taking individuals began the 25th Street rehab, not this council, not this mayor. About the only setback on 25th is the Union Square project. RDA, Reid, Godfrey, et al can take credit for that. It's interesting to see the fine offerings of Bill & Heidi and compare them to Union Square. That project needs to be in the hands of those who have proven themselves, not this bunch of make-believe developers who have given us Union Square, WalMart, the Riverwalk (Riverfront-what the hell is its name, anyway), and the mall site as it now exists. Oh yeah, we can give 'em credit for the Ogden Street Festival, Marshall White Center and the Union Depot too. It's a sad legacy of trying to fix something that wasn't broken, and they've apparently learned nothing from the mistakes of Dirks and his cronies, when they too went against public sentiment.
The old mall drove a stake through the heart of downtown. The concensus was that we did not want it, but it was ram-rodded through, just like most of these failed projects of today. Does anyone in the new City Building pay attention to lessons from the past? I doubt it, for along their merry way we go, with tax increments, "haircut" money, no attention paid to comments and suggestions from well meaning people, and trying to grab people's homes for big business.
I don't know about you, but I for one am ready to clean house this November. Jorgenson has recently spoken of "concerns" regarding the Tram, but his words are empty. It's a campaign ploy, and he'll rubber stamp the mayor in a heartbeat, couch at the Farmer's Market and all. Filliaga, nice guy, is retiring; Donna Burdett speaks well at times, but then votes for all of the Mayor's schemes (she needs to walk the walk, not just talk the talk); but thank goodness for Jesse Garcia (he should receive 100% of his Ward's vote). This man has heart and the people mean something to him.
The history portrayed here is quite accurate; the rest is personal opinion. But something needs to be done and this city has the past, the character, the atmosphere, the structure, and especially the people, to rebound and again be a political force to be reckoned with and a place where business wishes to be and where people want to put their home.
We have a groundswell of good thinking, hard working people (Ogden's work ethic is second to none) and that should be seperated from these lunatic fringe groups like the Concerned Citizens, etc., etc., etc. that has so disparaged the real process of change.
Think, gather with friends and neighbors, and lets find a way out of this malaise. Hey, were Ogdenites, we're champions and we can win this one. Let's cowboy up, go to work and move forward with a look at the past, the present, and the future.
I think there is a good case to be made that the Utah Mo Guy is one and the same with Mr. President! How could MoMan not be aware of the little thing that went down with President when he is a very regular vistitor and poster and complainer of the potty language that was going around for a few days?
Sounds a little disengenious to me for him to claim ignorance on this one.
Also this rant he went on about two people being responsible for a hundred different identities on this site was a bit around the bend. If that is the case, vitually every post on the site comes from one of two people!
The way I look at it is - one: He is jealous that this blog is hot and active and his may be languishing in comparison. By insinuating that WCF is really a farce with only two wizards behind the curtain pulling the levers WCF really isn't more attuned to, and popular with the public than his is. I visited his site by the way on a couple of occasions and it is pretty nice and well done, but it seems very apologetic toward the powers that be, and way to namby pamby on the real issues that confront the citizens of Ogden. In fairness to them, that is their stated mission, to point out the good in town. I say good for them, but even better for the more open and hard hitting WCF that exposes the duplicity and arrogance in some of our polititians.
The other potential MoMan motive is pretty much the same, only driven by the mayor and his team. That is to discredid and marginalize the WCF and make it appear that the mayor's opposition is only a very small group of dissadents, and that the public overwelmingly supports all of this madness that is going on at city hall.
I think he ought to lay it on the line and give us the names he thinks are the same persons posting fifty identities each, and the evidence he has to back that up. Maybe Rudi even has software that could answer that question? How about it Rudi, you only got two real contributors here? Damn, I wish some one else would jump in, my fingers are getting mighty tired!!!
My guess is that the WCF is making a lot of people nervous in Ogden, including this kid.
Trust me, I am most certainly not the president. I don't believe that I have ever used some of the words he used on a regular basis. I have seen his horrible rants, however, I did not ever see an official booting off by Rudi. Granted, I do not look at every thread. In addition, I certainly do not consider myself clever enough to be able to try to use another writing style, nor would I consider that moral on my part. So that would be my reasoning.
Also, trust me when I say that I am not jealous of Rudi. Many who post on this site have told me the reason why there is not a whole lot of commentary on my blog: I am not controversial in my style. I cannot remember who it was off of the top of my head, but somebody said something very true to me, "It is much harder to yell and scream at a picture." I accept that and actually get plenty of hits. My blog serves the purpose that I intended it to. So please do not ever think of me as some jealous, pouting kid who wants more. Heck, with school and a new position at work I almost wish that fewer people cared so that I could put less time into it. Of course, I lie, because I just cannot leave Ogden alone; it has come to mean too much to me. Just ask my wife and she will tell you. Also, if anybody is so pressed to know my name, simply e-mail me at thegoodinogden@hotmail.com and we can set up a meeting and talk. I have nothing to hide. I have always lived my life that way and will continue to do so.
As for who is the multiple personalities, I don't wish to go out and accuse people of things they may or may not have done, nor would I ever want to discredit this forum. However, the aspect of anonimity of blogger tends to let that happen. I guess I would simply hope that the people who are doing that would have the sense to be themselves and themselves only.
Also, as I have said before, the Mayor has just enough haters to be elected to a second term. That is all.
The mayor, in his desperation, is pulling out ALL the stops in regards to these schemes and things he has started and wants started. Why? Because he knows he's in trouble come election time and he figures he only has 2 years left in which to make his mark.
He'll be especially that way after the November elections, when the good people of Ogden dump the rubber stamp chumps that support him and grovel at his feet.
I too would be interested to know who "the two" are who does all the blog posting. That seems to be as big a readh as comparing the vacant lot used for pick-up ball as a kid, now having a church built on it, to that of loosing a home, where family and roots are, because the mayor wants to build another monument.
Ah, youth. Ain't it wonderful?
Hey counselor,
In my post I said that it was not the best comparison, but I believe it has some comparison in MY MIND. I'm sure I am not alone. I knew when I wrote that that it was a falacy. So LAY OFF! I may be youthfull, but English 2010 is still fresh in my mind. Simply saying that because I am youthfull means that I don't know anything at all is not a valid argument. I believe that we should move on from that argument.
I also never specified that one or two are doing it, maybe there are more, but it is surely happening.
Well Utmorman, the mayor of Ogden IS in his second term.
"I knew when I wrote that that it was a falacy." Interesting. Then why did you write that. To you it's a comparison; to me it's a reach. Goodness, son, it wasn't even your dirt, was it? Don't get testy (my goodness, you even used caps when you told me to "LAY OFF!"); I have the right to post my point. I'm sure there are those who frequent your blog that will support you, but probably not too many here. The two are apples and oranges (blogs and comparisons). Relax and take these observations in stride.
Also, I can't recall me stating that by expressing your youth that that denies you're making a valid argument. I like your stuff, but it, along with mine and everyone else's, is open to debate.
I have a hard time buying into the fact, as does Tom Luke, about you not understanding what went down regarding the president. You are a regular contributor and you read everything, I'm sure, and I recall you going around some with the president in the past. But who am I to suggest you don't know? If you say you don't, then you don't. But still....Hey, aren't you really the president in disquise? Running a diversion with this "2 guy as 100 different voices" theory, to take the heat off?
Just let a smile be your umbrella.
As I've said, I'm The Counselor and my advice is free, but I do accept contributions. Send them to the Re-elect Filiaga Committee.
I agree, and will simmer down. I simply find it unnecessary to make the same point over and over agin against a person.
Alright, Utmorman, you win. I won't use the example of comparing your somewhat empty feeling you have when you see a church being built on an old, vacant lot that you didn't own and in your youth played pick-up baseball games on to the same type empty feeling a family has who suddenly get their home wrenched out from under them and given to private enterprise by the mayor because he wants to build there another monument to his legacy before he rides off into the sunset. Nope, I won't use that comparison ever again.
;)
Contributions can be sent to the Filiaga Re-election Committee. Any amount is welcome.
Ut Mo Man you'se got lots to learn. I like your spirit tho and I think you will end up just fine if you keep asking the questions and paying attention to all the answers not just the ones that fit your preconcieved notion of the way thngs ought to be.
Trust none of what you hear, a quarter of what you read and half of what you see with your own eyes and you will be just fine.
It is all a game, enjoy it.
Post a Comment