Time is ALWAYS "of the Essence"

Is it just me, or does anybody else have the nagging sensation that the Ogden city administration does almost everything at the very last minute? We read in this morning's paper that the Ogden RDA board is scheduled on Tuesday evening to consider approval of an administration-drafted "development agreement" with New Mexico-based Ernest Health, Inc., for construction of a 40-bed long-term acute care facility, within the Ogden River Project.

Although the River Project has been on the drawing board for some four years, administration officials are only now getting around to submitting this proposed contract before the RDA Board for approval, a mere thirty days before some of the purchase options begin expiring. "Time is of the essence," says Chief Administrative Officer John Patterson.

Time is of the essence, indeed, chimes in Rudi. The timeline is terribly short. It has a very particular odoriferous essence about it, methinks.

Assuming at least a 15-day public notice requirement prior to RDA Board approval of terms for the required $3.6 million dollar loan, this would leave the RDA Board only about two weeks to start and complete their "due diligence," and digest and analyze the proposed contract document, even if they were to "table" the matter for consideration in a future RDA session.

It seems a "bit much," to expect the new RDA board to make a rushed decision on such a proposal, a mere five hours after they're sworn in. The Ernest contract may well be the best thing for Ogden since the coming of the railroad, but it seems to me that the RDA board needs a little more time for adequate study and deliberation.

I'd suggest that the matter be "put over" for at least another week; and I'll add that it would be nice if the RDA Board could "run the agreement by" an independent attorney for a private opinion. The City Attorney's office has a conflict of interest here, as far as I'm concerned. City Attorney Norm Ashton and his crew simply can't adequately serve two masters -- the RDA and the administration.

I'd also urge the new RDA Board to order up a complete RDA accounting at the earliest possible moment, just to determine exactly where the RDA stands financially. This is uniform practice any time new management takes the helm in private business; and there's no reason that the new RDA Board shouldn't follow the lead of private industry, as long as they're 'dabbling" in that area.

Maybe it would be better, for the administration to start negotiating option extensions, in fact.

I'll also add, parenthetically, that this rush scenario presents yet more evidence that public bodies like RDAs DO NOT BELONG in the property development arena. Commercial realities are such, in projects like these, that they do not promote the ideals of good government. Perhaps the Utah legislature will do something about this in the upcoming 2006 legislative session.

And what say our gentle readers about all this?