I'm going to open up an open thread on tonight's "League of Women" "debate."
If this "Weber County League of Women" "debate" is the best the local chapter can do... the Weber County Chapter needs to be drummed out of the national chapter.
It was an uncontrolled "slug-fest." It was nothing better than a bar-room brawl. (I have some exprtise on this, believe me.) I was embarrased at how the council incumbents were treated, by a so-called "moderator" who assumed zero "control" over the event. Even though I obviously don't support most of the incumbents, I actually started to feel sorry for them at this bogus-debate. The only thing the highly partisan crowd didn't do was throw rotten fruit at the incumbents. (not to say they don't totally deserve it.)
Tonight's "debate" was a complete disgrace to the League of Women organization.
That's my take.
Let's have an open thread on this.
I'd like to hear others' takes on tonight's debate.
I'd love to hear from attendees what they thought about this ridiculous and clownish event.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
16 comments:
You're right, Rudi.
I could have stepped up from the floor and said "candidate x buggers little boys," and the so called "moderator" couldn't have done shit about it.
Tonight's event was a joke.
So I noticed Dian's report on tonight's debate on another thread and was just wondering if you two guys were actually at the same meeting she was?
What I would like to know is did any one ask Jorgensen or Burdett about the mayor's and council's repeated assurance to the tax payers of Ogden that we would never be on the hook for the Rec Center, and now at the eleventh hour we are?
If these two guys from these two local small time outfits do not pull a giant rabbit out of the hat and succeed in an impossible financial situation, then we the people are going to eat an $18,500,000 turkey! Does any one really think that this glorified bowling alley and arcade is going to gross a hundred grand a day, every day of the week, in order to pay off this enormous debt load? Does any one, in or out of the administration, have any idea just what exactly the deal will have to do to break even?
I think Dorothy hit it square on the head when she said that this mayor and council were a ship of financial fools.
Have we been lied to all these months and years by Godfrey, Reid, Jorgensen, Burdett, Stevens and Sasten? I would include Filliaga in this rouges gallery but he never seemed awake long enough to understand what was actually going on.
Will the Godfreyites ever tell the public the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about all of their mulitple and shaky public financed projects?
Well yes, in fact they have scheduled a public truth telling for the day after the pope abdictates and marries a morman. Till then we will just have to wonder and trust and sustain them.
"So I noticed Dian's report on tonight's debate on another thread and was just wondering if you two guys were actually at the same meeting she was?"
Which thread was that?
Also curious about Dian's thread - while I agree some of the debate attendees were a little rowdy -Dian always seems to have a fresh and enlightening perspective
The meeting tonight wasn't a debate in the pure sense but several very interesting facts came out.
Councilwoman Burdett answered the question about spending $45,000. for a lobbyist with the statement that Ogden didn't like some of the legislation passed last year. This means Ogdenites are paying $45,000. for a lobbyist to try to get the legislature to repeal S.B. 184 (eminent domain).
Ogden is betting on another dead horse because this bill was passed unanimously.
What about consideration for Ogden residents who worked to get S.B. 184 passed? They pay taxes, too.
The shocker of the evening was when the three incumbents, Garcia, Jorgenson and Burdett, came to the microphone and stated - one by one - that they had not been told about the Central Weber Sewer District Survey regarding a necessary $120 million upgrade before they voted to pledge the BDO RDA tax increment funds for the Rec Center.
These RDA tax increment monies had already been pledged for the Sewer District upgrade because the Survey had been in the works for many months.
Mayor Godfrey and Councilman Safsten sit on the Sewer District board and received a copy of the Survey at the District's meeting on October 17, 2005.
Godfrey and Safsten violated their oath of office by deliberately keeping the results of the survey from the three council members before the vote on changing the allocation of tax increment.
They deliberately sabotaged the integrity of their own council members by failure to disclose this Survey.
No doubt about it Dorothy.
The $120 million Central Weber Sewer District Survey revelation is a "blockbuster" which will have repurcussions going far beyond last night's meeting.
Thanks again for your diligence, persistence and competence.
The citizens of Ogden stand deeply in your debt for bringing the facts to light.
Godfrey and Safsten definitely have some 'splainin' to do 'bout this.
Yes, we were at the same event! I did say that I hoped others would give their perspective. I guess I looked at it as being the nature of this particular event. At times, it became an opportunity for citizens to sort of hold incumbents' feet to the fire about decisions and/or votes those citizens were not pleased with. Some of that did happen.
A few times there were out of order comments from the floor, and the moderator would say, "This is not a conversation." And it stopped.
There was a lot of clapping after comments throughout, (and one or two boos,)---after a while, you could see what sides parts of the room were on. The moderator did nothing about this, thereby reinforcing the notion that it was all right to do, I imagine. If this clapping and rumbling was not supposed to be done, the moderator should have given the crowd ground rules, but since she didn't, I think people assumed that it was fine to "participate" in this way. In fact, it was mentioned at the opening by the League's president that sometimes these things became somewhat heated, and that they thought this was good, because it meant that people were involved.
It was not set up as a formal debate, in that competitors were not called on one by one to respond to the questions. It was more like a press conference, actually, (with the crowd taking the part of the press), and if the question was not addressed to a specific candidate, one of them would simply jump in and answer it. My impression was that they all had a chance to do this, but it was made clear in the beginning by the moderator that no candidate was to be put on the spot, or "forced" to answer a question which he or she didn't want to address.
Ozboy, in answer to your question, someone did ask about the delegating of BDO funds to cover the lease agreements in the event Fat Cats et al defaulted. Jorgenson took this question and answered by saying, "It's an option." I remember this clearly because I was taken aback by it---I had thought that, far from being an "option," it was now a part of the financing package.
This question was presented in tandem with remarks about Ogden's dilapidated infrastructure, and questions about what was going to be done about it. The response here, (and I think this was Burdett,) was that it will cost so much to totally re-do the infrastructure that the strategy now is to deal with that on contingency and just fix things when they break.
I will add that, in my opinion, some of the candidates at times unfortunately came across as being somewhat patronizing, which might have fueled the lack of decorum present in the audience. Perhaps in the interests of attempting to ensure that both candidates and audience had the opportunity to communicate, the League erred a bit on the side of informality. But in my opinion, the audience was certainly capable of conforming to rules of conduct, had they been given any.
But they were not.
Rudi,
I was disappointed in your remarks. I had the impression that you wanted to keep the public informed about the candidates and their views for this election on this blog. You never mentioned anything that was discussed -- you were too busy beating up the League.
Good job, Dorothy! It's a sad commentary on Ogden's governing body when an outsider has to inform them of information that they should have to make wise financial decisions. But then this seems to be a constant occurence in all of Godfrey's dealings with the Council. It's too bad we don't have an honest Mayor! If he runs again, people should hold him accountable for his deceitful, dishonest dealings and vote for a Mayor they can trust and believe! But there is no excuse for Safsten to withhold information from his co-Council members. SHAME ON YOU, RICK! If I were one of the six Council members that you withheld information from, I would ask for your resignation as Chairman!
Thanks, Dian, for giving us a little information of what was discussed last night at the debate.
INTERESTED PARTY--
You do not understand.
I am not an outsider.
Sorry to disappoint, interested party. But I've learned from years of blogging (WCF is my 3d blog) that the the best way to start out a discussion of events like last night's is to post a cranky comment, and let the readers fill in the rest.
As I've said many times before, I don't regard this place as my personal soapbox. This place belongs to our gentle readers.
It's a formula that works, AFAIC; the previous nine comments are evidence of that.
Rest assured though, that I'll probably post a few of my own observations, when I have the time and the inclination. I'm in the midst of some background research and fact-checking; and I'll no doubt have some red meat to add.
Patience, gentle reader.
Sorry, Dorothy, I didn't mean to offend -- I used the term "outsider" meaning someone who is not connected with City government (where the information should have come from).
The topic of "economic engines" was brought up repeatedly during the debate. There is much criticism on this site regarding the choice the current administration's to establish these engines, which is great and, in most cases, well-warranted. My question - what options would you recommend? If you were mayor for a day, year, decade… what would you suggest? I know there were several public meeting about the mall site beforehand (over five years ago) that posed this question to gather ideas. The outlet mall is far from being an original idea was discussed and I believe even courted with no response from potential investors. My question is not antagonistic but a sincere question about what catalyst you as blog contributors would utilize to turn this great town of our around. I appreciate (and am addicted to) the tough questions that are asked on this forum but can we use some of that potent brain power to come up with some solutions?
Really good question, Tigresslover!! Let's see...
The major problem I see with the way the current administration is attempting to create revenue streams is that this, in my opinion, is not its job and government is not set up to do that. Regarding the mall--for four years we have heard one thing or another about it, that this or that is happening. This to me is not simply an indication that things have unfortunately fallen through, but an indication that the city's master plan leaves no room for private enterprise which may not wish to conform to it.
And that is perfectly understandable. If one is putting private assets into a revenue producing enterprise, one does not want a local government dictating everything about that project and how it should go. Better to go somewhere else, especially since one is using one's own money and assuming the risk for it.
It is said that private enterprise did not come forward and that is why the city is doing this development. I disagree. I think the city has such a stranglehold on available property, and the irritating tendency to attempt to micromanage every prospective developer who comes in, that the Master Plan for development has ended up by stifling the private enterprise they say they are trying to lure in.
So what would I do?
First, sell that land that the Episcopal Church wants to it. Then make it clear that we are amenable to negotiate, parcel by parcel, with interested developers and business owners. Share with them the plans for how the Treehouse Museum is going to be, how the office building is going to be, and the Episcopal Church's park. Let the site grow and develop on its own with a minimum of criteria and micromanaging. Of course there are businesses that shouldn't be right there, because the site should be a harmonious part of our downtown. But this does not mean that it should be totally mapped out with a master plan that allows for no deviation, or creativity, on the part of individuals who wish to participate in it.
The attitude prevalent in the administration seems to be that Ogden City and its tax dollars are the property of the administration, to do with what it sees fit. This is not right or true. Ogden City does not belong to the administration. It does not belong to the local government. It belongs to us.
Basically, the way I look at it is that we hire them to provide services for us. That is even what they are called--public service. If you hire someone to manage your property, for instance, that person does not have the right to tear it down or remodel it, uproot trees and re-landscape, threaten to throw you out of it, and then make you pay for it. And this, in my opinion, is analogous to what they are doing.
I've always thought they don't understand the job, really. What they should do is take a look at this city and ask---what do these people need to make things better for them? And we are in such a bad state right now that our needs are very basic ones. Clean water and working sewers. Grocery stores in the center of town, not at each end. Well staffed police and fire who will be able to respond in a timely manner to problems. A punctual transportation system that goes where people need to go.
So I think the basics should be gotten in hand first, along with a push to encourage local businesses. In my opinion, local businesses are far more valuable to the stability of an area than a WalMart, or any kind of corporate entity or manufacturing plant from outside. I cannot understand the attitude that our lives depend on gigantic entities coming in from out of state to save us. This to me is a vile and condescending attitude more illustrative of Colonialism than of running one's own country.
I had a friend who was a retired Foreign Service officer, and he told me about a post in the Far East where the foreign service personnel had built themselves a sort of country club and golf course. The natives of the country could work there, but they couldn't join. They could clear the tables and wash the dishes, but they couldn't eat in the dining room. And I see a similarly misplaced sense of elitism and ownership in city planners.
I guess what I'm saying is that I'd love to see us rebuild our city ourselves. An incredible number of very successful entrepreneurs have come from Ogden. Browning Arms didn't get there by waiting for a successful gun manufacturer to come in from back east, in other words. And in my opinion, the schemes and plans and deals the city is making with the favored few has slammed the door in the faces of quite a few others. I'd like to see that door open and see what happens.
I agree with Dian that the City Government needs to get out of the business of owning a high adventure rec center in conjunction with Golds Gym and Fat Cats. It is wrong to prohibit people from participating in a project that was built using their taxes. I've said all along to let businesses develop the old mall site. I've also heard the reply, we tried. But I ask you, "How hard did you try?" The only thing that I've seen the Mayor want on that site is the high adventure rec center. He hasn't really given anything else a fair chance. Since the suggestion of an outlet mall using the "early 1900s architectural design as Historic 25th St. has surfaced, I would like to see down town Ogden developed with that theme. If the outlet stores won't come to charming Ogden, then let's go after other businesses that are unique and different than what Layton and Riverdale have. But the first thing Ogden has to do is go through their UNFRIENDLY, OUT-OF-HAND REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW BUSINESSES and cut out all the unnecessary hoops that the staff has businesses jumping through. Cut the paper work from 40 pages to 10 required for starting a new business within Ogden.
I feel that the assets that Ogden possess are not being sold properly to perspective businesses - an educated, hard-working workforce, a beautiful university with dedicated staff, a world-class ski resort 20 minutes away, the city is starting to see a rebirth. Like the stock market, get in on the ground floor to realize the greatest rewards. Give them a few tax incentives, but don't bond the residents and tie up capital improvement income for 25 years to build buildings for businesses. If we develop downtown in the turn-of-the-century theme, we would have many more movie companies here to film shows. They would be bringing in additional revenue at restaurants and clubs. If we had policemen walking their beats and were visable at all times, we would see people returning to downtown, and feeling safe to walk the sidewalks again. We would have a drawing factor, as any old-theme town has. We should entice nice restaurants with tax incentives, and they could have quaint little tables outside, with big umbrellas to shade patrons. Also, there is the good possibiity that the Smithsonian Instition will put a railway museum at Union Station which will bring between 2 and 5 million visitors to Ogden each year based on the records of other Smithsonian museums around the country. Besides we would have something with which to draw some of the 7 million visitors to Temple Square. Let's look at Ogden and sell her as a city that is going through an exciting rebirth! But we are going to have to take care of the old infastructure instead of bonding us for 25 years with a very risky venture and some risky business partners. Even if it takes a couple of years to develop the plans and engage the businesses, we would still be further ahead in obtaining a solid tax base. Because with the high adventure rec center, tax revenues are going to be returned to Fat Cats and Golds Gym. We have 30 days to try and talk sense into the City Council and Mayor. Let's go for it! We have nothing to lose, but a lot to gain!
I really wish I knew what portion of Ogden's population thinks that the local government should get out of the land developing business, and how many of them are perfectly content with it and think that everything is the government's responsibility.
I really hope there are a lot of the former, who let these views be known at the polls. We'd be a lot better off if government went back to being government and quit trying to be a player in big business.
Great comments Dian, I agree with you in the role of what government should be. I've been a member of Gold's Gym for over ten years and I really don't picture them as a fly-by-night entity and I don't have much information about Fat Cats other than nephews who say it is a pretty happening place. So I wonder if a better solution would still be to create a Rec Center but on a more limited scale with less government involvement and taxpayer risk. I do think it could be an effective downtown draw in that the 25th Street Gold's already has a build in clientele which is what we need - continued people in the heart of the city, on a daily basis. I hate to see it be so black and white with a "the Rec center must be destroyed" attitude that seems to be permeating the debates and this site. As with anything in life I think compromises can be met if ALL sides are willing to come to the table. I also agree with the idea of making the process quicker and easier for grass roots businesses to flourish - I believe you are right on about local vs. box store and this demonstrates one of the reasons that would discourage outlet stores from locating downtown - due to the costs of refurbishing vs. building out in the farm land of West Haven or Plain City. It would take the heart and brawn of locals who care about the city and it's history to restore what now sits vacant.
New comments are not allowed.