Notwithstanding a variety of pesky "loose ends," such as the lack of signed agreements with the building contractor and materials suppliers (concrete, steel and lumber,) the city's bonding package is ready to hit the market. Moreover, a "ceremonial" ground-breaking has even been tentatively planned for Monday, December 12th, at 11:00-12:00, (according to an unimpeachable source of mine close to city hall.)
Although the Tribune article suggests that Ogden city expected to have "$16.2 million in hand" by Tuesday afternoon, such a scenario is unlikely, inasmuch as all legal prerequisites for the project are not yet fulfilled. What's more likely is that such funds are being held by the lender in escrow, to be released only upon finalization of all prerequisite underlying contracts.
In this connection, optimistic statements continue to flow from the city administration's incessantly optimistic Dave Harmer:
"Harmer said the construction agreement with R&O Construction is expected to be signed this week, and the costs will be nailed down within the next two weeks. Concrete, steel and lumber prices have been rising, but Harmer said the final costs should be in line with projections. 'We estimate we'll be OK,' he said."These are not minor details, gentle readers. If city officials are pleased with the legal posture of this project a short 31 days from the January 1, 2006 "drop-dead date," they certainly shouldn't be. With major players like the general contractor and materials suppliers remaining "out of contract," this project could have a thrilling finale, as the unsigned project players jockey for position days prior to the project deadline. Don't think for as minute that the unsigned players are unaware of the short timeline here, and that they won't play the running clock to the hilt.
Attentive readers will note that our rec center poll still remains in the sidebar, by the way, with 90% of participants betting the project won't happen. Be sure to vote in the poll, if you haven't done so already.
If any of our gentle readers have additional comments, please don't hesitate to chime right on in.
Update 12/2/05 1:52 p.m. MT: The Standard-Examiner was Johnny-on-the-spot with its rec center ground-breaking announcement this morning, confirming our report yesterday that a public ceremony has been set for 11:00 a.m. on December 19. Most of the details in John Wright's article were "old news" to our gentle readers. We've already had a pretty good discussion of this topic. Here's a quote from John's article:
Also on Tuesday, the city signed a construction agreement with Ogden-based R&O Construction, the general contractor for the rec center, Harmer said.One important additional detail does emerge from today's article, however: R&O Construction apparently inked some kind of pact on Tuesday. Although the construction contractor and "the braintrust on nine" have no idea at all how much the necessary construction materials will ultimately cost, the city has finally put at least one of the major players under some vague contractual obligation. This is all government propaganda, BTW.
Under the agreement, there is a 15-day period during which the two parties will
finalize construction costs, he said.
The nature of that legal obligation is unclear. The parties to the agreement have not yet "nailed down" materials costs, as John Wright's article aptly points out. Materials costs are essential element in any enforceable construction contract -- and that essential part has been curiously "left out." Until firm terms are worked with suppliers out for price and delivery, the R&O-Ogden City contract is a sham and is probably unenforceable. Today's Std-Ex article is yet another example of the '
suits from Sandusky" scamming their readership, and sucking up to what's left of the Godfrey Government.
A second detail also comes to the fore. If it turns out that the project, as planned and sold to the City Council, can't come in "on budget, the Roman Style "emperor on nine" announces he'll feel free to carve out whatever part of the project he chooses to eliminate -- just so that the project will come in within the council-authorized budget.
Query: The council authorized bonding for a specific project, which would include a flo-rider pool, a wind-tunnel, and a state-of-art climbing wall..
If materials costs come out overly-exorbitant, which one of these would the Mayor whittle away?
And here's an even more fundamental question: Does the "little guy on nine" have even the bare legal authority to modify the rec center plan, now that the council has approved a very specific one?
My answer to my own question is NO. Mayor Godfrey has been authorized to implement a specific plan -- the one that was presented to the council. He hasn't been authorized to implement a whittled-down one. Anything he does contrary to his authorization is ILLEGAL.
If our imperial mayor wishes to hack parts off the rec center project in order to make budget, he'd durned well go back to the city council for further approval.
The little guy is still hawking that Imperial Plato emperor neoCON thingy, where he says he won't "stick his finger in the wind," and he imagines himself a "Philospher King.'
Too funny!
And one other thing! Gentle Reader Dorothy Littrell, CPA, has crunched the numbers and graciously offers a sobering professional analysis of how much the rec center scheme will cost the taxpayers in interest, on a monthly and yearly basis.
Comments?
20 comments:
I have been trying to find a word to describe the actions of Ogden City regarding the Rec Center--
Stupidity doesn't cover it --
Incompetence isn't harsh enough --
Malfeasance in office is getting closer --
Better yet -- arrogant, untouchable, financial
idiocy -- promoted by a fearless leader who doesn't understand the 25-year snow job he is smothering Ogden City with.
Let's hope the Legislature wises up and passes an I.Q. test requirement for common sense to hold office.
Dorothy
If the State legislature did the IQ test thing that you propose we would end up with only two elected officials in Ogden City Government. In January we would add two more.
It would also of course almost totally wipe out the legislature itself!
At the public info meetings, the question about cost overruns was asked. "Where are you going to get that money if the costs go up?"
At the info meeting, Dave Harmer answered that they would "look at the project," and see if they could come up with ways to save that money. He assured the public that no tax dollars would be used should the rec center run into cost overruns.
Given the fact that the contractor deal is not yet locked in, as per Rudi, this means that hard costs are not yet in. You can "look at" hard costs all you want, and they will not go down. So possibly, the solution to the "rising cost of steel," etc., would be a cut in labor and/or labor salaries. If this even comes together.
I am thinking, in view of the vote at the city council meeting that approved this project and allocated the BDO leases to it as security, that these loans also are not yet locked in. At least, they couldn't have been at the time of the meeting, because the required security had to be locked in by that vote.
So it was somewhat erroneous to say that the city was going to issue these bonds. I mean, that was the plan, but the financing was not in place. Couldn't have been.
So probably for the past couple of weeks, the lenders have been doing due diligence. The loans were probably in a pre-approval condition at the time of the meeting.
And I would think that this question of overruns would be part of the due diligence. The project has to get finished and have Fats and Golds inside and paying leases before the payback on one series of bonds is possible. If more money is needed for construction, the whole thing will be thrown into question and have to be revised, maybe.
It's in question now, to my way of thinking. How can they be dealing with loan companies for this project when they don't know what the hard costs are?
The Portland Aerial Tram, by the way, is now up to a cost of $45 million, after an initial estimate of $15 million, and the latter estimate was the one that was approved by the Portland City Council. The "rising cost of steel" was one of the factors cited as a reason for this tripling of the original estimate.
I really hope we don't go down that road.
Cost of steel lifts tram's price tag: South Waterfront: The aerial tram might now cost Portland $45 million, nearly triple the estimate from 2003: The Oregonian, Saturday, October 22, 2005
Interesting comments about the Fred Leeson cost overrun story, Dian, on one Portland commisioner's (Sam Adams') local community blog.
Query: Will we be having similar discussions about the rec center project here on Weber County Forum in the very near near future?
Very interesting comments indeed, Rudi! Thanks for linking that.
I especially like the part about "property owners who will benefit from the tram" being asked to help out with cost overruns.
Incredible. Wonder how that would go over here.
As to your question:
"Will we be having similar discussions about the rec center project here on Weber County Forum in the very near near future? "
I would say that I really, really hope not.
With this inept gang that can't shoot straight at the helm it is almost gauranteed that the good ship Ogden will run aground on this Rec Center. If they bring it in under $25 million it will be a miracle.
Just look at their record. Not one single thing they have tried has worked as they have said it would. Stuart Reid and the little mayor are the two most incompetent dealsters in the history of Utah government.
Tid-bit: Remember when Al Gore got "Bush-whacked?" He lost himself in academia's lecture circuit and even taught a class or two. He also grew a beard.
Seems that Kent Jorgenson has taken a page from Al's book, "How a Defeated Politician Survives," and has "Goren" a beard. Can a tenured position, teaching "Transportation, 2006," at Weber State be far behind?
Thank you Amy! I'm glad you brought up the rec center we have down here in Bountiful. I'm more than a little skeptical when I hear people say that the rec center will be a salvation for downtown Ogden. I look at the Bountiful rec center (we call it the "bubble" because of the big, white, round tarp they've put over the outside pool in the winter) and it hits me that people don't come to shop in Bountiful, whether it be on Bountiful's Main Street or the 5th West commercial area, because they're coming to the bubble. If you took the bubble away, people would still shop at Barnes and Noble, Bountiful Music, etc. The existence of the bubble is pretty irrelevant to how well the businesses do.
Just a thought...
Thanks for those links, Amy---I was unaware of this Bountiful rec center.
This is really odd. These rec centers are getting like WalMarts--one every few miles or so.
Perhaps the Wasatch Front will become an area of competing rec centers. And also, there is that one perhaps going up in Payson.
I am still shaking my head about the comment about the property owners "benefitting" from the Portland Tram being asked to help out with cost overruns.
Can't you just see it? "All right, Treehouse, Boyer, Earnshaw, Miller, PRI,---you have to help us out here. You are, after all, benefitting."
That is, if it all works out.
I did notice at the Council meeting where the rec center was approved that certain developers spoke in favor of the issue, and stated that they would not come in to develop if the rec center did not go through.
But not one of them, to my recollection, said that their projects would for sure come in if it did go through.
There's a big difference there.
How are the signings with these developers going--anybody know?
My own belief about this development of the mall site is like what CC writes. I simply cannot believe that the rec center is crucial to my going downtown to shop or see films. It amazes me that the developers have come forward and stated belief that it is.
Maybe there are deals going on that I don't know about that would make this more clear.
Another thought -
I can't remember any time a public official down here in south Davis County has touted our new rec center as something that will help local businesses prosper. Usually they just talk about how good it will be for the local high schools and how the new facilities will be all around better for the public to use.
Dian:
There is a major difference in the two Rec Centers. The one in bountiful is owned and run by the city for the benifit of the citizens of the city. It has the normal stuff you find in a city recreation center, pool, tennis, and other sports oriented things.
The one in Ogden will be paid for by the citizens but run by a couple of private businesses for their own benefit. It will also have all that other BS - parachute ride, wave pool, arcade, etc which is terribly expensive, paid for by the citizens and will be for the benefit of rich folks from Idaho, Nevada and probably Oregon too. Unlike the Bountiful center, the one in Ogden will not be welcoming any of the poor or middle class folks of inner city Ogden.
And Bennie - although Jorgensen was Glasmannized in the election, he willl never be sanatized in the hearts and minds of Ogden. His name will live in infamy along with the other moronic gang of sixers who sold the citizens of Ogden down the drain with this dumb assed idea of theirs. He may try to hide behind a beard but people in this town will always remember him for the snake that he is. As for him teaching at Weber - well the only thing he would qualify to teach is treachery and stupidity and breach of fiduciary duty.
Glasmann stood up and said lets stop this madness and the voters agreed and voted him in. Jorgenson had more loyalty to the little lord mayor and he turned a deaf ear to the voters. The mayor's ego monument was more important to him than the people of Ogden.
Rudi, seeing as how this is Weber County Forum, maybe you should write a post about Weber County Recorder Doug Crofts, who claimed his neighbor's land near the mouth of Weber Canyon as his own. There was a "Get Gephardt" about this on channel two news the other night.
Inauguration Day is but a month away, perhaps the crowning moment of this year's Holiday Season. A three person group, yea, even the individuals themselves, autonomous, their allegance bound to the people rather than to one group or any one individual, relying only on fact, input, study, research, to show them the way.
This group of newly elected individuals are poised and ready to rise to the occassion. Our energy should now be spent in support and looking ahead instead of looking back and resurrecting the ill-gotten gains of the past. That era is over; the past to be replaced by the "NOW."
"The times, they are a changing."
Yo PO
What "ill gotten gains"?
There aint no gains, ill gotten or otherwise.
Try ill gotten losses. That is all this lame duck, lame assed council has given the people of Ogden.
You're right, Ozboy---big differences between the two.
I suppose we must all mark December 12th on our calendars. What time of day is the big ground-breaking--anyone know?
I was trying to remember the cost overruns on the Intermodal Hub. Seems it was something like a little over a million on a $5 million building. I find this, from today's Standard, curious:
Also on Tuesday, the city signed a construction agreement with Ogden-based R&O Construction, the general contractor for the rec center, Harmer said. Under the agreement, there is a 15-day period during which the two parties will finalize construction costs, he said.
Very unusual, I think. What I infer from this is that we have signed an agreement with R&O without knowing what the cost of the job will be. Very, very odd. Because...shouldn't a project like this with municipal involvement be put out for bid? Posted notices for a certain period of time, and all that?
Have no idea how they've gotten around this one. Perhaps R&O won a bid years ago. But in that case, since years have passed and costs have changed, my opinion is that it would have been better to re-open the bid process. Signing a contract for something without knowing how much it will be is really an unusual way to do business.
According to Wright's article in today's paper, the cost over-runs are to be handled by various "options," as the mayor says. Some of those options include (10eliminating certain things or items of the building; and (2) "finding" the money. It's the latter that scares me, the "finding the money."
I find it interesting that only the Mayor and Harmer were quoted and made the paper. I thought that was a City Council involved, a council that was part of the "Checks & Balance System" that for so long has not been doing much checking or balancing.
I'm hopeful that the new look council will perform in this regard, and not be cowtowed by the Administration or others and uphold it's position of being in a, as I've heard one newly elected council person say, "custodial position."
It is vital that this center be a success. It is vital that it be built and operated as represented, and that each governmentla branch executes its authority.
Dian -
Rather the city put it out for bid or not, R&O is a very fine and capable construction company. They have lots of experience doing big projects, and they are very upstanding and honorable. At least that was my experience a few years ago when they did a project for me.
It is vital that this center be a success. It is vital that it be built and operated as represented, and that each governmental branch executes its authority.
Absolutely, politico.
I mention the things I do because of the possibility of unforseen adversity, which is not unknown on these city projects. Should things stall, grind to a halt, or fall apart, of course the entire process will be analyzed to see how and why. And it would be a lot worse for us if the analysis led to the conclusion that we knew about flaws and/or problems going into this and went in anyway.
There's a point in any project where all possible research and plans have been completed, and the only course left remaining is to jump in--I realize that. But in my opinion, we did not reach that point on time and are jumping in anyway, and this might leave our new Council a gigantic clean up job if things go awry.
The more unknown variables a project has, the more it is out of the control of the people behind it. And not having control of the project certainly will not contribute to the success that this needs to be.
The Mayor said that he had confidence in R&O bringing this in within budget. My thought is that it would be better if he had a contract from R&O stating that it definitely would be brought in within budget. Perhaps this will happen within the next fifteen days. Ozboy's good experience with R&O is heartening.
Am I too conservative? Perhaps, to some people. Over and over again at the rec Council meeting, I heard those for the project state that "everything involves risk." This is true, but there are grades of risk, and my opinion is that if one is in charge of administering public money, or pension funds, or retirement funds, or any pool of money that people require for future needs and security, the risk involved should be as low as possible to still be profitable and not lose anything.
This is High Adventure, indeed.
High adventure it is....real good play on words, as serious as their intent.
I have been involved with R&O before, both personally and as a representative, on some major projects. Orluff Opheikens (Ownder and CEO) is a man of high charcter, integrity, and a stand up guy who prides himself in doing it right (that's why they get the major projects that they do). In his most capable hands, we are ensured that doing it right will prevail, but the City must stay right on top of everything, with the consequences of what it's doing foremost.
On the ohter side of the coin is the Checks & Balance Sytem, wherein the City Council and the Administration must work hand in hand. I'm sure that here, the Council will make its presence felt, for this is a huge gamble, the dice are spinning, and they absolutely have to come up 7 or 11, and they understand what's on the line. Co-operation overseen by checks and balance.
Prior to any military invasion, battle planners set the plan through research and knowledge of the respective antagonists. This plan, when set down on paper, could fill a freight train of box cars. But when the first shot is fired, you might as well blow up the box cars and all they contain. Things change and adaption and improvisation take over. Fortunately, there's more control here than on some beach the troops are storming. But this scenario does apply to the Rec Center to a degree, for here, as in everything, there will be unknown variables that will have to be dealt with. That's where the personal element comes in, and how best to accomplish the original goal or objective. Believe me, there will be some changes, some modifications, in time, material, and money. That's a given, the nature of the beast, but in a spirit of co-operation and the understanding of the ABSOLUTE NEED TO SUCEED, as represented, ALL involved must adopt the attitude of give and take, with the underlying motive of serving and protecting the people, which this thing is all about.
Though I've differed with the methods, it's here. We've got it. The objective now, as I see it, is (1)success in completion; and (2)success in operation. Once achieved, the others, hopefully, will come, bringing their own dollars, to help in the rehabilitation of our Downtown. Dominoes, anyone?
Like I said earlier....the past is past and the issue in now. Where best to expend our energy, battling a slain beast or feeding and grooming what's now in the corral?
New comments are not allowed.