I believe today's commentary should set these accusations to rest. Her very compact but information-rich article demonstrates that she's as familiar with the gondola project details as anyone can be, given the paucity of information that gondola advocates have revealed. Not only that, Dr. Millner reveals that she fully appreciates her solemn responsibility to make fully-informed decisions on issues which will fundamentally effect our very important Weber State University institution, now and in the future.
Dr. Millner is like many of us in this community. She needs more information before she makes up her mind. I'll incorporate here what I consider to be the "gist" of Dr. Millner's commentary:
As we consider the urban-gondola project, we need to learn more details of the proposal so we can understand the potential impact on the development of our university and the transportation needs of our students. How will these plans affect our students? What will this mean for our campus community, including our neighbors who live in the area surrounding campus? So what's the next step? After we understand Mr. Peterson's development plans for his property, we need to see a detailed business plan that outlines financing strategies, economic impact, timetables, etc., for the urban gondola project. With this type of information, the university community will be able to consider this project within the context of campus master planning.
In that spirit, I look forward to continued discussions with all these groups about what the future holds. We have an opportunity to engage in a discussion that allows the free and open exchange of ideas to debate the pros and cons of these issues in a civil and productive manner. That's one of the fundamental principles of a strong democracy.
Yes Dr. Millner; I agree. It's a detailed business plan we've all been waiting for.
Thank you Dr. Millner. Bingo! Damn, you're good.
This document is not a detailed business plan, by the way. It's a sales brochure -- and not a very good one at that.
President Millner has issued your dissertation assignment; and it's time Lift Ogden folks set off to work. Enough of the inspirational happy talk. What the smart folks want to see is the beef!
This might be a good starting point.
And before my Lift Ogden friends jump all over me; I'll just say this. Sooner or later gondola advocates will have to come up with the kinds of information our decision-makers and the concerned general public want to see. Why not put it together sooner, rather than later? Once the necessary information has been made available, then -- and only then -- the real discussion can begin.
The strategy of doling out bits of information in dribbles and dabs -- on an ad-hoc basis -- isn't working out at all. It seriously compromises credibility, in fact.
Yes. It's a detailed business plan that's needed here, I think.
Am I right about this, gentle readers?
16 comments:
Duh! How can you even try to debate a project plan, without seeing the plan laid out on the table? Kudos to President Milner. It's nice to know some of our government leadership is rational and ethical, and won't let itself get swept away in all the emotionalism.
Milner for Mayor of Ogden!
If only our Ogden gang of six had the ethics and morality she displays in her commentary article.
I'll bet Dr. Milner ain't shoveling piles of cash to her university cronies neither.
>>>The problem is not the need fo a plan. The problem is the need for cooperation to help develop a plan.<<<
Wrong. It's the job of the promoters to package and promote it.
When there's a detailed and coherent business plan in place, then we can all debate it. Until then, any debate is futile. Dr.Milner is completely correct.
The ball is in your court, Bernie.
Bring us a coherent business plan. That's all us citizens ask.
Then we can talk.
Bernie said: "The problem is not the need fo a plan."
"fo"??????
I love it when you lily-white mo-mo honkies try to do "jive" talk.
Once again, the fact that LOC and the Mayor are not builders and developers is in GREAT evidence. All this BS about a plan and not being able to design a plan without WSU on board is laughable.
Work up a "CONCEPT," people, and present that to whomever is involved, be it the WSU Administration, the McKay-Dee Hospital, or whomever.
That is step one, a CONCEPT. Once you develop that and present it to all involved, you will get the sense whether or not a "PLAN" is the next step or it's "back to the drawing boards."
Use your heads or get someone on board who understands how these things work. If not, you'll wind up with another failed project, just like most of the Mayor's are.
I'm sorry to say this but you're completely wrong, designer. We all get the concept. Dr. Milner plainly "gets" the concept. Lift Ogden has been "selling" the concept for months.
We're at the "submit a coherent business plan" stage now, dummie.
That's what Dr. Milner said today.
What's wrong with you anyway?
Can't you comprehend a simple newspaper article?
Now that you,ve finally arrived here Bernie, tell us how you defend the Godfrey-Reid secret severence bonus deal.
I'd love to hear this from a brother-in-law, who ethically practices law in Weber County.
Enlighten us, Bernie.
Tell us your bro-in-law didn't get caught with his hand in the cookie-jar on this one.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
First, please publicly disclose your familial relationship with Matthew Godfrey, our Ogden City Lord Mayor.
You're his brother-in-law, right?
Then we can talk about my present incarnation, and whether you even deserve to converse with me.
And you apparently forgot to comment about the legal/ethical propriety of the Godfrey/Reid secret severence bonus deal.
I would suppose you might have some views on that.
Was it barely legal? Was it moral? Was it ethically right?
Let's get down to the nitty-gritty, Bernie, now that you've finally deigned leave your ivory tower,to visit here and offer your comments and everything here.
In regard to recent insulting and demeaning comments, such as althepal has made on this subject, the more I come to realize that blogs are for fun and sport rather than for substantive argument and discussion.
It's no mystery to me why essential journalism still resides in the hands of the true media, newspapers, radio, and televison and it will be a cold day in hell before that changes.
Do you mean "true media" like the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC News? With credible and reliable sources like these it makes no sense that people have (in droves) found blogs, internet mews, AM radio, etc, to get information. The monopoly days of agenda filled, spoon feed liberal garbage is finally over!!!
Good point, Bob. The same standard should be applied to all projects that require public participation.
I really like Dr. Millner's suggestion, that project details should be embodied in formal business plans.
Not only does that assist public decision-makers; it allows the general public to be fully-informed, once the public discussion begins.
Everyone is still missing the point....until a formal "concept," other names are "conceptual proposal," "Site plan," and or "concept plan," wherein all of Milner's questions are answered in her 4th to last paragraph, is submitted to those governmental agencies, City and County Planners, involved, nothing will happen except for the talk. And we all know that talk is cheap.
The "concept" would include renderings, properties effected, time, finanacials, ability to perform, all bundled up into a nice package required to start the project for real, and presented to the various Planning staffs. Once there, it's bent, shaped, tweaked, then gone over with the developer/builder and when both parties are satisfied, sent to the Planning Commission for vote. If it passes, then onward to the County Commission or City Counci, for another vote, usually with attached "conditions."
This is what a true "concept" is; it IS NOT this BS and newspaper article stuff we've been hearing from those in favor and those against, for the last several months. It's the beginning of the process to build the gondola, and features both legs, the Malin's Basin Plan, et al, so don't be too quick to dismiss the "designer," especially in the un-classy way that althepal did, because of ignorance of the process.
First, a "concept"submission; second, a "Plan," on Milar; and third, the actual construction begins.
It’s silly and sad that we’ve come to this. All ears are on building or stopping a gondola, with no thought to keeping our current system functional and fostering more ideas. Ultimately, to get out of debt and invest in this community’s development, we’ll need a lot more than the incremental tax revenue of another ski resort, the accompanying hotel and restaurant revenue, and the hopes of a national outdoor retailer trade show. I think it’s time everyone should take a step back and conclude this debate for good, so we can get on to more critical matters.
To Lift Ogden: Do yourself a favor and include in your plan some numbers on paper that people can get behind. Here’s a start. Last year, Utah had one of its best ski seasons on record with $667,258,065 in non-resident and international visitor spending. Tell the public about this and any trends that show how much revenue comes to this area, and any possible projections you could reasonably forecast. Put some kind of connection together to show how a gondola can positively affect the numbers. (I still haven’t figured out what magical power the gondola has to make skiers who aren’t currently visiting and spending dollars in Ogden to drop their moneybags into our economy, but if a car traveling on a wire is that exciting to the outdoor recreation and convention industries, God bless them.) You may also want to provide the class with successful case studies of West-facing ski slopes. How many are there in the world? Nail down some of the details that are brought up at LO meetings, but not nailed down like, car type, fare costs, where the ski area will be, etc. I don’t think this is too much to ask, and if put together right, it can make a compelling case for your cause.
To the Smart Growth folks: Thank you for the information about Malin’s Basin. It is definitely useful, understandable, and compelling. But Bob G is right. Ogden needs revitalization and fast. I’m a little lost about your ideas for public transit. Frankly, I grew up in a big city, and currently reside as far north as you can and still be an Ogdenite. I have no sense of traffic problems in Ogden. I get to where I want to go in record time. Maybe I just have a different perspective. I’d like to see you expand on some of your other ideas presented on your website. I like the idea of bringing businesses into downtown—how are we going to do this. I also feel creating neighborhoods with easy access to charming stores, not just big box retailers, is a good idea that needs more details. If you can put together a plan for downtown and our neighborhoods that’s half as compelling as the report on Malin’s Basin, you will be doing us all a huge favor.
No due date on this assignment, just brownie points with the taxpayers and voters.
You're getting far too caught up in semantics, R.O.D. and designer.
Even Bob G. concedes the "concept" has been put forth, and fairly well understood.
Terms like "conceptual proposal," "Site plan," and or "concept plan," are mere gibberish, and add NOTHING to the discussion.
Bob G. is smart enough to indicate they're working on the "plan."
I'd say the LO people are about a half-year ahead of others who intend to submit alternate, well-detailed "business plans."
"Concept" is what you draw on a napkin in the diner when you're trying to gain the attention for your idea.
"Business plan" is a "word of art" within the investor community, which describes the entire detailed blueprint that you take to interested investors and possible co-partners. Business plans have formal attributes which everybody in the investment community understands. Dr. Millner is entirely correct. It's reassuring to find her at the helm of Ogden city's arguably most important public instritution.
It's that QUALITY that people like Ann Millner and many of the citizens are looking for.
Try to keep up, boyz.
"Idea" is what the napkin thing is.
"Concept" is the FIRST formal step that the Planners insist on, which was what the hell I was writing about in the beginning.
It isn't semantics, it's fact. It's the way the "idea" is presented by the developers to those it involves (Planners, Councils/Commissions, property owners, etc.) If you're going to play the game, you should really understand what the proper equipment is that you'll use. When you become a developer, residential-commercial-retail-gondolas), you MUST use the PROPER terminology with those who have the power to say "yea" or "nay." Next time you want to try your hand at it, slide on down to the Planners and give 'em a napkin and say "here's the concept....what's next?" They'll give you a packet that informs you how to submit your "concept," which is what I was refering to in my original post. It's the first rule of real estate: EVERYTHING is put down on paper, or it's meaningless.
Ideas are bantered about; the "concept" plan is on paper and submitted to the Planners for review and adjusting. From there, the Final Plan is prepared and submitted. I feel that if you're dealing with the so-called savior of Ogden, and $20,000,000 to $40,000,000 are at stake, one had better understand the semantics and the meaning of words. Ask an attorney if the right words are important or not or if they should just be pushed aside as "semantics."
To conclude, getting caught up in this minutia is foolish and disagreements should be presented in a dignified manner without the slurs.
Remember, next time you have an "idea," put it on a napkin; then, when you want to begin construction, present the written, formal "concept," "conceptual proposal," or "site plan" to the Planners and the process will begin. Simple stuff with the correct words.
I'm finished. Time to move forward.
Bernie, you seem all tied up in knots. This blog "discusses" stuff, and you'll find people who disagree with you and agree with you. For 3-4 months WCF has been up and running, with you extremely silent. Then, suddenly, you become visible, and go off on these rants and raves. This is fine, but you are doing in your way what you chastize people for doing in their way.
Relax, put down your ideas, and don't get so damn upset over people who disagree with you. If that's done in a vile, tasteless manner, infering somebody is stupid, doing some character assassination, then have at 'em.
But good lord, my friend, you're so steamed up that I can keep my morning coffee warm by just setting the cup by the PC screen.
You seem smart enough, for a lawyer anyway, that I'd like to read more "substance" rather than this verbal harangue (sp?). Maybe you could shed some light on the subject instead of getting on everybody's back because of their position.
Like I said, "you seem smart enough." I agree, hot coffee is very important in the overall scheme of things, but my choice is hand ground Columbian or Hazlenut.
Anyway, I too have a problem with vile and sordid shots at people who'se only fault was a blog entry. There is absolutely no reason to disparage the Geigers, the candidates, or anyone else, simply because they might have an opposing view on things. At least those people have come to the front and given something of themselves. They set a good example of what "getting involved" is all about. Here, dignity is paramount, and I, also being somewhat guilty at times of what I'm talking about, am taking those lessons to heart. Ah, what we can learn from our mistakes, if we would just let ourselves.
Cool of you to join Smart Growth, as one in the middle of the fray should have a perspective from both sides.
New comments are not allowed.